> ...given an instruction-tuned model, post-hoc masking of the state-space during generation then amounts to just changing the generation distribution...
Isn't that what we did with test driven development?
The primary difference was our generator functions were human instead of LLM. Why not cut out the middle-human?
Yes. And if that human was smart and knowledgable they would use property based testing to automatically generate test inputs. Most libraries make it trivial to do for custom data types and can even reduce the failing test case to a minimal size input. I have been using this since 2008 and it was around before that.
I think what I am saying is tangential to TDD. I am not really even concerned about the ability of LLM to function as desired, and its verification.
I was rather concerned about a broader fundamental question - how does post-hoc guided generation interfere with the potential benefits of instruction-tuning?
Isn't that what we did with test driven development?
The primary difference was our generator functions were human instead of LLM. Why not cut out the middle-human?