Active Prompting: A Comprehensive Guide for the Future of Prompt Engineering
thepromptengineer.org
thepromptengineer.org
Here's the relevant section from what I can gather from parent's response:
> These are especially applicable in human-computer interaction interfaces where physical movements act as prompts.
And lest you think this criticism is unfair, take a look at the author's 24 hour submission history-- 3x for this website in the past 15 hours.
It’s difficult to believe that in a system that’s (a) non-deterministic, and (b) is prone to sometimes serious hallucinations, prompt engineering would be generally effective.
Are there any good counter-arguments to this?
For example, let's say the LLM learnt about color theory from: 1. academic articles, 2. artistic discussion forums, 3. reddit ( :) ).
If you wanted to steer the output from a certain "niche" you could create context in the prompt that makes the LLM more likely to create output (ie a continuation of the prompt, sort of). Tricks I've seen is stuff like "You're a super-smart, best in your field XYZ, tell me something about...". But I bet you could similar good output by using lingo and vocab specific to either niche to "prime" the LLM.
Take with lots of salt-grains, just my pet-theory.
Writing prompts is like writing good search queries, and the techniques developed today will fall away tomorrow as the models and generation parameter settings get better. This has happened rapidly with diffusers, and will likely happen with language models.
The system isn't non-deterministic, although there are a fair number of parameters used to try to make it seem like it (temperature in particular). But given the same prompt, zero temperature, and the same seed, you'd get the exact same output each time. The injected pseudo-randomness is deliberate.
Having said all that, there are a handfuls of key phrases or instructions that do allow you to get more than you would from simple conversation English. For example, asking a model to use Tree of Thoughts and Chain of Thoughts in calculating its answers does have an effect. The same with asking "are you sure" for some models can yield corrections and refinements.
Edit to also say: you are correct that there are a lot of people selling secret sauce or magic techniques and those are pretty scammy.
Same with SEO, yes, putting all you content in an image is bad, but as a rule of thumb ranking = relevancy * content * honest backlinks * google secret sauce.
If you are able to avoid the obvoius footguns, there is no need to ever hire a Prompt-Engineer /SEO-"expert"