• CheesyFox
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    9 hours ago

    except for poison to take in, it should be a pretty significant part of the dataset. Also, ngl, i’m not much informed on the topic, but aren’t all the datasets, if we’re talking about generic diffusion models and LLMs, already been formed? From what i gather, the innovation in AI mainly comes from utilizing new architectures, rather than training a model on something unique.

    • rizzothesmall@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      8 hours ago

      The datasets are constantly expanding as new content is generated online. There’s a degradation issue currently where the models are training on incorrect data generated by previous iteration of their own or other models and effectively poisoning itself to more confidently give the same incorrect information in future.

      • CheesyFox
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 hours ago

        i’ve heard of the dataset poisoning and degradation caused by llm-generated content present in the dataset myself, but i’m not sure whether it was a practical observation, or a mere experiment. And I still fail to see how new datasets are really useful for developing a new llms, or how it’s a problem for the devs to switch back to the older datasets.

        And the cornerstone stays the same: to have any significant effect on the final LLM quality, shouldn’t the poisoned (either by llm-produced content, or by intentional poisoning) data portion be… well, statistically significant?