Those are just words inside arbitrary tags, they aren't actually thoughts. Think of it as asking the model to role play a human narrating his internal thought process. The exercise improves performance and can aid in human understanding of the final output but it isn't real.

▲

antonvs 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Why do you believe that humans have access to an “internal thought process”? I.e. what do you think is different about an agent’s narration of a thought process vs. a human’s?

I suspect you’re making assumptions that don’t hold up to scrutiny.

	▲	fc417fc802 2 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		I made no such claim and I don't understand what direct relevance you believe the human thought process has to the issue at hand. You appear to be defaulting to the assumption that LLMs and humans have comparable thought processes. I don't think it's on me to provide evidence to the contrary but rather on you to provide evidence for such a seemingly extraordinary position. For an example of a difference, consider that inserting arbitrary placeholder tokens into the output stream improves the quality of the final result. I don't know about you but if I simply repeat "banana banana banana" to myself my output quality doesn't magically increase.
	▲	2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		[deleted]