I thought Chain of Thought would work better out of the box; it took specialized training like for o1 to really make it work well.
And I didn’t guess that parsing HTML in linguistic form would prove so hard that people would almost need vision capabilities to make agents capable of using webpages, which reduced the financial incentives for working hard on agents.
I still expect agents to change the alignment landscape. Perhaps they already have, with people working lots on LLM alignment on the assumption that it will help align the agents built on top of them. I think it will, but I’d like to see more work on the alignment differences between agents and their base LLMs. That’s what my work mostly addresses.
Did this happen? At least not obviously.
I was wrong. See my retrospective review of this post: Have agentized LLMs changed the alignment landscape? I’m not sure.
I thought Chain of Thought would work better out of the box; it took specialized training like for o1 to really make it work well.
And I didn’t guess that parsing HTML in linguistic form would prove so hard that people would almost need vision capabilities to make agents capable of using webpages, which reduced the financial incentives for working hard on agents.
I still expect agents to change the alignment landscape. Perhaps they already have, with people working lots on LLM alignment on the assumption that it will help align the agents built on top of them. I think it will, but I’d like to see more work on the alignment differences between agents and their base LLMs. That’s what my work mostly addresses.