@vluzko My argument for N/A is that you previously said that you are going to resolve as YES unless OpenAI says that Bing is not actually GPT-4. I don't think they said and but now you don't even consider this possibility.

Early version doesn't mean not GPT-4. It is literally GPT-4, just another checkpoint.

Specialized for search does not indicate another model as well. There is an API for developers which has the "system window" which is used for prompts which are apparently handeled as a special case. One of the most obvious (and I believe it's the default way) is to write something "You are Sydney, a new chatbor from Microsoft which is a part of new Bing, your goal is ...". This alone is enough to call it specialized, as well as infrastructure which makes it access repl it. I would still call it GPT-4 nevertheless.

@ValeryCherepanov The first point is mostly fair, and the reason I'm reconsidering is that I think Microsoft has said several things to the effect of "not literally GPT-4" and has not said "literally GPT-4". I don't feel bound to the OpenAI part of it.
The checkpoint part is... obviously earlier checkpoints are different models? Like there's a range of similarities with the first checkpoint being totally different and the penultimate checkpoint being almost exactly the same, but I clearly stated literally GPT-4.
I agree that "specialized for search" does not necessarily imply any finetuning, but it's additional ambiguity.

I'm going to resolve N/A. I'm sorry everyone for the Bing-related fuck up, I should have been much more careful about giving criteria for what would change my mind about the Microsoft announcement.

@vluzko I don't think checkpoint are necessary different model tbh. For example, when ChatGPT just launched, they made a few updates to it, around 1 per 2 weeks and I think some of them uses different checkpoints of the same underlaying model, they used it for trying to fix specific jailbreaks for example.

Although it's hard to say definitely because often people take some model, fine-tune it and give it some completely different name.

I think N/A is appropriately here

@ValeryCherepanov Yeah I would not call those the same model, they're just being marketed under the same brand. I don't care about the marketing, I care about the underlying model. "Different checkpoint of the same underlying model" is just not meaningful. The model is its weights.

@Mira The closing date wasn't so soon, but it turns out you can close a market early.

@DouglasSchonholtz See the discussion below.

@vluzko @Nikola can you try? Saw you attempt Monty fall in the other market

@firstuserhere Seems to not be the case.

@Nikola I assume it also cannot run internet searches, even indirectly?

@vluzko This doesn't make it resolve YES as per your comment below?

https://blogs.bing.com/search/march_2023/Confirmed-the-new-Bing-runs-on-OpenAI%E2%80%99s-GPT-4

@IsaacKing

@IsaacKing I had not seen that, thank you for sharing. This page does say "early version" though, which is annoyingly ambiguous. If we get no additional information I will resolve YES based on this, but I am going to wait a few days in case OpenAI says something like "Bing is only running GPT-4 without RLHF" or "Bing is only running GPT-4 with half the training finished".

@vluzko GPT-4 without RLHF is still GPT-4, no? What makes a GPT-4?

@VincentLuczkow Bing added additional stuff on top of GPT-4 to allow it to search the internet, so it's unclear whether that should count as "literally GPT-4". Seems like a larger change than finetuning, for example, which you said wouldn't count.

@IsaacKing 10 days ago Vincent said pretty firmly that if Bing was GPT-4, then he'd resolve yes. I'm voting by word-of-market-author here.

@Mqrius You have to read the actual comment they posted.

@IsaacKing hrm I guess.

@IsaacKing They almost certainly have not changed the underlying model and have just written infrastructure to do communication between the model and the internet (probably with some prompting so the model can distinguish internet input and user input). If they did modify the model to use the internet directly (which would be crazy, that's a huge lift for basically zero gain), that would not count.

@vluzko Confirming: When you say "would not count", you mean it wouldn't count as Bing being GPT-4, since it's too different?

Bing runs on GPT-4 doesn't mean Bing is GPT-4. GPT-4 is the name of the LLM, Bing is a product that uses an LLM and integrate ability to use an internet search. I'm quite sure that the GPT-4 API will not provide internet search ability. However anybody will be able to integrate any internet search, calculator or whatever (as with GPT-3, someone even did integrate ability to run Python programs it writes, an obvious security nightmare of course)

@IsaacKing It is not even clear what it would mean to modify GPT-4 to directly access the internet (convert it into some kind of hierarchical model, I suppose??), but yeah if they did that the market resolves NO. But they didn't do that, and I think everyone reading this can safely forget about this possibility and just focus on whether the Bing version of GPT-4 is finetuned and/or missing additional training that OpenAI.

@L Yes