Yet another LLM guy claiming it solved a problem when in fact it was already solved, with it being told almost exactly where and what to look for. Cold reading for use-after-frees.

Now I'm wondering if an infinite sequence of nested LLMs could achieve AGI. Probably not.

So "unintentional moderates" are those that both choose deliberately to believe in centrist political ideology and to participate in groupthink?

The Wikibooks book on statistics is surprisingly decent. Hopefully it inspires the reader to acknowledge that there are a lot more things to study apart from Bayes.

So perhaps one alternative way to estimate their quality is to check the number of citations, many have more than 100 citations, which is a sign of quality

Andrew Wakefield's 1998 paper has 457 citations on PubMed