I’m not sure trying to tease out high-integrity information from Wikipedia is a useful contribution at all. Our criteria of proof is whatever a private clique of wiki editors or worse their security-complex handlers say? I feel like LLMs have already achieved this and the results are about what you would expect.
I don't know what/who the "security-complex handlers" are, but it's quite useful to start with the supposedly biggest repository of human knowledge. Maybe you realize the causal relations you tease out are low-quality, or maybe you realize that even Wikipedia can provide useful causal relations that you can apply downstream.
But that's from the research POV. If your POV is immediately practical, then yes, it's about as useful as training a new employee using Wikipedia articles about your company.
Side-note: LLMs have actually proven quite useful given that they were trained on mostly what was available online.
Comments
I’m not sure trying to tease out high-integrity information from Wikipedia is a useful contribution at all. Our criteria of proof is whatever a private clique of wiki editors or worse their security-complex handlers say? I feel like LLMs have already achieved this and the results are about what you would expect.
I don't know what/who the "security-complex handlers" are, but it's quite useful to start with the supposedly biggest repository of human knowledge. Maybe you realize the causal relations you tease out are low-quality, or maybe you realize that even Wikipedia can provide useful causal relations that you can apply downstream.
But that's from the research POV. If your POV is immediately practical, then yes, it's about as useful as training a new employee using Wikipedia articles about your company.
Side-note: LLMs have actually proven quite useful given that they were trained on mostly what was available online.