> You'll find that the resulting output becomes incoherent garbage.

I also do that kind of things with LLM. The other day, I don't remember the prompt (something casual really, not trying to trigger any issue) but le chat mistral started to regurgitate "the the the the the...".

And this morning I was trying a some local models, trying to see if they could output some Esperanto. Well, that was really a mess of random morphs thrown together. Not syntactically wrong, but so out of touch with any possible meaningful sentence.

▲

lotyrin 2 days ago | parent [-]

Yeah, some of the failure modes are the same. This one in particular is fun because even a human, given "the the the" and asked to predict what's next will probably still answer "the". How a Markov chain starts the the train and how the LLM does are pretty different though.

▲

arowthway a day ago | parent | next [-]

I wonder if "X is not Y - its' Z" LLM shibboleth is just an artifact of "is not" being a third most common bigram starting with is, just after "is a" and "is the" [0]. It doesn't follow as simply as it does with markov chains, but maybe this is where the tendency originated, and later was trained and RLHFed into the shape that kind of makes sense instead of getting eliminated.

[0] https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=is+*

▲

psychoslave a day ago | parent | prev [-]

I never saw any human starting to loop "the" as a reaction to any utterance though.

Personally my concern is more about the narrative that LLM are making "chain of thoughts", can "hallucinante" and that people should become "AI complement". They are definitely making nice inferences most of the time, but they are also totally different thing compared to human thoughts.

▲

stavros a day ago | parent [-]

I've definitely seen (and have myself) gotten stuck in phrase loops. We call it "stuttering".

▲

psychoslave a day ago | parent [-]

Good point, we human definitely have defects too. I’ll reflect on this, though this doesn’t make me consider that chip inferences to be fully analog to what happen in humans when they are thinking (or any animal/entity ongoing a thought process).

	▲	stavros a day ago \| parent [-]
		Yeah, fair. I'm just not generally a fan of the perfect world fallacy. Something might not be perfect, but it still might be as good as the alternative.