Remix.run Logo
verdverm a day ago

yes, and... pretty much everything in the Ai field comes back to "data makes more difference"

danielmarkbruce a day ago | parent [-]

Sure, and most days it doesn't rain.

verdverm a day ago | parent [-]

depends on where you live, an important feature for data points about weather pattern probabilities

the underlying data set needs to be representative

danielmarkbruce a day ago | parent [-]

RLVR and RLCR really don't need a whole bunch of special data.

verdverm a day ago | parent [-]

the algorithms technically, sure, however the outcomes definitely depend on data quality and coverage like any other training method, this is well known

danielmarkbruce a day ago | parent [-]

I don't think you've ever done either of these training steps. You are just handwaving.

verdverm a day ago | parent [-]

you know what they say about making assumptions, yea?

and then you are going to ignore all the research and results that clearly show otherwise? why?

what might we infer about the importance of data from a learning algorithm like decision trees?

danielmarkbruce a day ago | parent [-]

Read the paper. They train RLCR on existing big math problems. They subtract a brier score penalty from the correctness reward. No new confidence labels are needed.

Existing datasets, different reward function.

verdverm 20 hours ago | parent [-]

> Read the paper.

I did, in the first days Jev came out, when people were bringing it up. Another assumption. Please review the HN commenting guidelines, the one which starts with "Please don't comment on whether someone read an article." is relevant here.

Nothing in that paper changes that ML algorithms are dependent on the training data. We can step back from Jev and algos to consider Bayes Theorem. If your sample is not representative of the population, your resulting statistics will be off. The same is true here. If the data you train a model like Jev with is not representative, the probabilities and confidences it outputs will not be representative.

What makes Jev interesting is that it works well out of the box across domains. What people who are well known in the field believe is that this is the result of Typesafe having a really good training data set. People are saying similar of MiMo-2.6 today.

danielmarkbruce 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

"Did you read the article" doesn't apply to a link someone put in a comment. If you are going to be a hall monitor, at least do it properly. You are just acting in bad faith at this point.

verdverm 9 hours ago | parent [-]

You are not engaging with actual points, instead attacking a person based on your bad assumptions and projections.

We both know who is

> just acting in bad faith at this point.

danielmarkbruce 8 hours ago | parent [-]

The relevant data is the reasoning trace. Doesn't need user data. You can learn from people's detailed reasoning steps how confident they are, even outside your domain.

Take RL 101. This is a common pattern.

verdverm 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

HN post from today that has a more detailed explanation

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49816899

https://www.alexmolas.com/2026/09/23/jev-cant-be-calibrated....

8 hours ago | parent [-]
[deleted]