> Why not have the LLMs do as much work as possible and have humans review and put their own name on it?
That's not a good way to improve on the accuracy of the LLM. Humans reviewing work that is 95% accurate are mostly just going to rubber-stamp whatever you show them. This is equally a problem for humans reviewing the work of other humans.
What you actually want, if you're worried about accuracy, is to do the same work multiple times independently and then compare results.
That's not a good way to improve on the accuracy of the LLM. Humans reviewing work that is 95% accurate are mostly just going to rubber-stamp whatever you show them. This is equally a problem for humans reviewing the work of other humans.
What you actually want, if you're worried about accuracy, is to do the same work multiple times independently and then compare results.