Some users describe the bias in Claude and Kimi chain-of-thought outputs as genuinely cute and harmless, noting that avoiding it entirely would require highly advanced techniques.
Based on 1 visible X reactions from 7 accounts; directional sample.
Ask a question below.
Published answers will appear here.
Models consistently chose safer activities while claiming random selection.
For this particular example, the bias is genuinely cute and harmless. Avoiding all bias would require highly advanced techniques, roughly on the level of mechanistic interpretability. If we could simply create a highly intelligent model biased toward the right values, we could ask it to solve mechanistic interpretability for us.
Really cool experiment invented by @HarryMayne5. Models are meant to choose randomly but bias their answers to their own preferences. They tend to prefer safe and non-polarizing activities. I wonder how much this influences their recommendations in general.
Thinking about all of those French high level public servants that use Claude to analyse the impact of this or that public policy. As if it were not biased af (on top of these guys own ideological biases)
Some users describe the bias in Claude and Kimi chain-of-thought outputs as genuinely cute and harmless, noting that avoiding it entirely would require highly advanced techniques.
Based on 1 visible X reactions from 7 accounts; directional sample.
Ask a question below.
Published answers will appear here.