I’m building Chat Brawlers, a side project where three models answer independently, read each other’s responses, debate and vote. At first, I made one design mistake: treating their agreement on an answer as a way to find the best answer. Originally, the debate stopped only when all three voted for the same model. But imagine: Model A: “Use Postgres.” Votes for A. Model B: “Use Postgres.” Votes for B. Model C: “Use Postgres.” Votes for C. That’s a tie, even though there’s nothing left to debate. I changed the stopping rule: after each round, a separate judge compares their conclusions. If they give the same answer, the debate can end even when the votes are split. There’s a trade-off: the judge might overlook important conditions. “Use Postgres” and “Use Postgres unless X” aren’t necessarily equivalent. So far, the judge has considered these details. submitted by /u/lluisantoni
Originally posted by u/lluisantoni on r/ArtificialInteligence
You must log in or # to comment.