| ▲ | smusamashah 3 hours ago | |||||||
With this speed, you can keep looping and generating code until it passes all tests. If you have tests. Generate lots of solutions and mix and match. This allows a new way to look at LLMs. | ||||||||
| ▲ | Retr0id 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
Not just looping, you could do a parallel graph search of the solution-space until you hit one that works. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ▲ | turnsout 19 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||
Agreed, this is exciting, and has me thinking about completely different orchestrator patterns. You could begin to approach the solution space much more like a traditional optimization strategy such as CMA-ES. Rather than expect the first answer to be correct, you diverge wildly before converging. | ||||||||
| ▲ | Epskampie 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||
And then it's slow again to finally find a correct answer... | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ▲ | MattRix 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
This is what people already do with “ralph” loops using the top coding models. It’s slow relative to this, but still very fast compared to hand-coding. | ||||||||