Thanks! I couldn’t find that source, but “Chekhov’s Gun” is indeed mentioned in the original Anthropic post—albeit briefly. There’s also this Tumblr post (and the ensuing discussion, which I still need to digest fully), with a broader overview here.
While I have more reading to do, my provisional sense is that my main new proposal is to take the “narrative completion” hypothesis seriously as a core mechanism, and to explore how the experiment could be modified—rather than just joining the debate over the experiment’s validity.
I’m not convinced that “this experiment looks too much like a narrative to start with” means that narrative completion/fiction pattern-matching/Chekhov’s Gun effects aren’t important in practice. OpenAI’s recent “training for insecure coding/wrong answers” experiment (see here) arguably demonstrates similar effects in a more “realistic” domain.
Additionally, Elon Musk’s recent announcement about last-moment Grok 3.5/4 retraining on certain “divisive facts” (coverage) raises the prospect that narrative or cultural associations from that training could ripple into unrelated outputs. This is a short-term, real-world scenario from a major vendor—not a hypothetical.
That said, if the hypothesis has merit (and I emphasize that’s a big “if”), it’s worth empirical investigation. Given budget constraints, any experiment I run will necessarily be much smaller-scale compared to Anthropic’s original, but I hope to contribute constructively to the research discussion—not to spark a flame war. (The Musk example is relevant solely because potential effects of last-minute model training might “hit” in the short tiem, not for any commentary on Elon personally or politically.)
With this in mind, I guess it’s experiment first, full post second.
(Full disclosure: light editing and all link formatting was done by ChatGPT)
I’ve heard that hypothesis in a review of that blog post of Anthropic, likely by
AI Explained
maybe by
bycloud
.
They’ve called it “Chekov’s gun”.
Thanks! I couldn’t find that source, but “Chekhov’s Gun” is indeed mentioned in the original Anthropic post—albeit briefly. There’s also this Tumblr post (and the ensuing discussion, which I still need to digest fully), with a broader overview here.
While I have more reading to do, my provisional sense is that my main new proposal is to take the “narrative completion” hypothesis seriously as a core mechanism, and to explore how the experiment could be modified—rather than just joining the debate over the experiment’s validity.
I’m not convinced that “this experiment looks too much like a narrative to start with” means that narrative completion/fiction pattern-matching/Chekhov’s Gun effects aren’t important in practice. OpenAI’s recent “training for insecure coding/wrong answers” experiment (see here) arguably demonstrates similar effects in a more “realistic” domain.
Additionally, Elon Musk’s recent announcement about last-moment Grok 3.5/4 retraining on certain “divisive facts” (coverage) raises the prospect that narrative or cultural associations from that training could ripple into unrelated outputs. This is a short-term, real-world scenario from a major vendor—not a hypothetical.
That said, if the hypothesis has merit (and I emphasize that’s a big “if”), it’s worth empirical investigation. Given budget constraints, any experiment I run will necessarily be much smaller-scale compared to Anthropic’s original, but I hope to contribute constructively to the research discussion—not to spark a flame war. (The Musk example is relevant solely because potential effects of last-minute model training might “hit” in the short tiem, not for any commentary on Elon personally or politically.)
With this in mind, I guess it’s experiment first, full post second.
(Full disclosure: light editing and all link formatting was done by ChatGPT)