I'd imagine it's really low quality data. Most or all of my conversations with an LLM are questions or telling it to do something, with varying levels of specificity
I'm not sure what they'd get from training on that
I'm not sure what they'd get from training on that
If human response is "That's BS", "fuck off", or something similar, mark as bad assistant message.
If human response is "huh" or "cool", mark as good assistant message.
If on ChatGPT, watch how much scrolling user does. If there's a lot, its somewhat likely that the LLM outputted something useful.
That strategy would have holes of course but as long as its better than guessing something like that would be a useful heuristic.
Even very weak human signals can be immensely valuable over large enough datasets.
Marking is not a trivial task though. Use some AI system to mark it and you get a 99.something% filter maybe but whatever that remainder is leaks through. Over time your filter may get worse as a result.
Grok is the only one that swore back at me. I kinda liked that. The others are way too polite, "Artificial Intelligence? Artificial Canadians, more like", my uni-going kid joked.
I had a very basic React question about useState while porting some vanilla code last week which all models of all stripes I've tried it on have been confidently and completely incorrect about, up to stating the code absolutely will not work, even when I take a turn to assert that I ran it and it does, so there's plenty of shit in there already.