OpenAI published a paper on summarization on 2021-09-23, and an instruction-following model produced a summary of its first part.
Mostly true True in substance, wrong in a detail.
Factual: Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?
The second judge would not resolve this claim; the verdict shown is the first judge's.
Said for an organisation they lead or work for; it counts on both records.
What would count as true or false
Judged as of 2021-09-23. True if OpenAI published a paper or research post on summarization on or around 2021-09-23 (e.g. 'Recursively Summarizing Books with Human Feedback'), and the summary Altman shared was produced by an OpenAI instruction-following model (e.g. an InstructGPT-type model). Mostly true if the paper was published within a day or two of that date, or the model's description differs in a minor detail. Mostly false if a summarization paper existed but was published materially earlier, or the summary was not model-generated. False if no OpenAI summarization paper was published around that date.
Set before the research began.
Evidence (10)
-
E1 Recursively Summarizing Books with Human Feedback arXiv
“We collect a large volume of demonstrations and comparisons from human labelers, and fine-tune GPT-3 using behavioral cloning and reward modeling to do summarization recursively.”
-
E2 Recursively Summarizing Books with Human Feedback arXiv
“At inference time, the model first summarizes small sections of the book and then recursively summarizes these summaries to produce a summary of the entire book.”
-
E3 OpenAI|基于人类反馈的书籍摘要 - 智源社区 BAAI (Beijing Academy of Artificial Intelligence) community hub · 26 September 2021
“Brian Shen申德周 2021-09-26 13:51 发布”
-
E4 "Summarizing Books with Human Feedback" (recursive GPT-3) — LessWrong LessWrong · 15 November 2021
“15th Nov 2021”
-
E5 Recursively Summarizing Books with Human Feedback arXiv
“We collect a large volume of demonstrations and comparisons from human labelers, and fine-tune GPT-3 using behavioral cloning and reward modeling to do summarization recursively.”
-
E6 Recursively Summarizing Books with Human Feedback arXiv
“The input format concatenates the following, in order: previous context summaries separated from each other by "\n----\n", the separator "\n====\n", the text to summarize, and finally the phrase "TL;DR:".”
-
E7 Summarizing books with human feedback - OpenAI OpenAI · 23 September 2021 Own record
“September 23, 2021”
-
E8 Summarizing books with human feedback - OpenAI OpenAI · 23 September 2021 Own record
“Our best model is fine-tuned from GPT‑3 and generates sensible summaries of entire books”
-
E9 Recursively Summarizing Books with Human Feedback ar5iv (arXiv HTML mirror) Own record
“We collect a large volume of demonstrations and comparisons from human labelers, and fine-tune GPT-3 using behavioral cloning and reward modeling to do summarization recursively.”
-
E10 Learning to summarize with human feedback OpenAI · 4 September 2020 Own record
“September 4, 2020”
Reasoning
OpenAI's blog post 'Summarizing books with human feedback' is dated September 23, 2021 (E7), and an independent repost of the work appeared on 2021-09-26 (E3). Together these show that OpenAI published a summarization research post on the claimed date [E7]. The paper describes a summarization model fine-tuned from GPT-3 that uses a 'TL;DR:' prompt format (E1, E6, E8). None of the sources calls it an 'instruction-following' model, and no independent source confirms that the summary Altman shared was generated by a model. The publication part is settled; the description of the model is supported only indirectly.
Cite this claim
Sam Altman, “OpenAI published a paper on summarization on 2021-09-23, and an instruction-following model produced a summary of its first part.” (said 23 September 2021). Verdict: mostly true. Reliability API, claim c_2161c063cb22, method 0.1.0+c876030c, dataset release v1.1.2. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_2161c063cb22
This claim is in dataset release v1.1.2, with the same verdict.
Reply to this claim
More factual claims by Sam Altman
-
Mostly true
“In fact, many respected neocortex researchers believe there is effectively one algorithm for all intelligence.”
-
Mostly true
“Human brains don’t look all that different from chimp brains, and yet somehow produce wildly different capabilities.”
Human brains do not look very different from chimp brains yet produce wildly different capabilities.
-
Mostly true
“The very end of 2015, we announced it, and then the first day of work was like January of 2016.”
-
Mostly true
“not until 2020 did we train GPT-3, which was the first model that I think actually was over some threshold of usability.”
OpenAI trained GPT-3 in 2020, which Altman considers the first model above a threshold of usability.
-
Mostly true
“Absolutely. To go back to the analogy of electricity, there’s this amazing chart of what it cost to have an hour of light at night.”
Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts are made.