alexcdot

6 ms·

1.
by alexcdot 8mo ago
unfortunately a lot of ML conferences don't provide DOIs for their accepted papers. Citing much older works also falls through here
2.
by alexcdot 9mo ago
Problem is that most ML papers today are not independently verifiable proofs - in most, you have to trust the scientist didn't fraudulently produce their results. There is so much BS being submitted to conferences and decreasing the am
3.
by alexcdot 9mo ago
Absolutely, expectations and tools given by management are a real problem. If management fires you because they are wrong about how good AI is, and you're right - at the end of the day, you're fired and the manager is in lalaland.
4.
by alexcdot 9mo ago
There are a ton of edge cases and a bit of contextual understanding for what is a hallucinated citation (i.e. what if its republished from arxiv to ICLR?) But to your point, seems we need a tool that can do this
5.
by alexcdot 9mo ago
I really like what IJCAI is doing to pay reviewers to do this work, with the $100 fee from authors Yeah its insane the workload reviewers are faced with + being an author who gets a review from a novice
6.
by alexcdot 9mo ago
really good point. one of the cofounders of gptzero here! the tool gptzero used in the article also detects if the citation supports the claim too, if you scroll to "cited information accuracy" here: https://app.gptzero
7.
by alexcdot 9mo ago
hey, i'm a part of the gptzero team that built automated tooling, to get the results in that article! totally agree with your thinking here, we can't just give this to an LLM, because of the need to have industry-specific standard
8.
by alexcdot 3y ago
Really like the product vision here, excited to try it out!
9.
by alexcdot 3y ago
I didn’t know I needed a death metal cover of Star Wars until now. Awesome stuff!
10.
by alexcdot 4y ago
the model at https://gptzero.me is different now, it does sentence-level prediction as opposed to the old GPTZero disclaimer: i'm familiar with creator