Ultimately the new data, the slight incrimental improvements to the body of code for training) will actually come from humans even though it was written by ais.
ais write 1000 bits of garbage code for 1000 different users one-offs, the users judge that most of those didn't work out but 2 did. Only those good results that humans approved becomes part of the growing body of reference code. The others either get thrown away, or even if they still exist, they are somehow known to be low quality, or at least, not known to be high value.
So an ai wrote some new code that worked and improved the total corpus that other/future ais reference, but it's not just ai output feeding ai input, it's ai output filtered through humans who nixed most of it.
(Maybe exists on github but not used by anyone. It isn't known to be bad, it's just ranked lower, but if nothing else fits as well, it's there to try. That way obscure code that's good eventually becomes known to be good.)
Comments
Ultimately the new data, the slight incrimental improvements to the body of code for training) will actually come from humans even though it was written by ais.
ais write 1000 bits of garbage code for 1000 different users one-offs, the users judge that most of those didn't work out but 2 did. Only those good results that humans approved becomes part of the growing body of reference code. The others either get thrown away, or even if they still exist, they are somehow known to be low quality, or at least, not known to be high value.
So an ai wrote some new code that worked and improved the total corpus that other/future ais reference, but it's not just ai output feeding ai input, it's ai output filtered through humans who nixed most of it.
(Maybe exists on github but not used by anyone. It isn't known to be bad, it's just ranked lower, but if nothing else fits as well, it's there to try. That way obscure code that's good eventually becomes known to be good.)