so that we can tell the finalizing LLM to do a deep thesis on the parallel replies.
I constantly find that finalizing replies are too light; they basically summarize the parallel replies in a rather cursory way. A symptom of this is that, even if I use a reasoning model for finalizing, it will use very light reasoning or simply no reasoning (much lighter than a normal reply).
Because I do math-heavy science, I constantly want to tell the finalizing LLM sth like: βCheck each parallel reply with independent and critical eyes, evaluate each thoroughly, point out their errors, and distill the core insight.β
Please authenticate to join the conversation.
Open
Feature Request
10 months ago
Get notified by email when there are changes.
Open
Feature Request
10 months ago
Get notified by email when there are changes.