autogen VS aici

AutoGen is an AI framework by Microsoft designed to streamline multi-agent conversations. AutoGen allows agents to communicate, share information, and make collective decisions. This setup enhances the responsiveness and dynamism of conversations. Developers use AutoGen to tailor agents to specific roles, such as programmer, content writer, CEO, etc. This enhances their ability to handle tasks from simple queries to intricate problem-solving.

I am still playing around with the project but FYI, the parsing for the github repo URL at https://glide.agenticlabs.com/ will fail if there's a trailing slash in the repo link i.e. https://github.com/microsoft/autogen/ won't work but https://github.com/microsoft/autogen will.

New example notebook demoing video transcript translate with whisper.

New release: v0.2.1

I disagree with the conclusion. In software, I've seen 10x engineers in person and I don't think they're replaceable. Whereas, the new college grad or that entry level dev who doesn't design anything and just writes small amounts of code, doing exactly as told is replaceable by an AI. Frameworks similar to Microsoft Autogen(https://github.com/microsoft/autogen) can in theory build agents who can do these tasks with ease whereas a 10x engineer can focus on directing the agents and designing systems.

Microsoft autogen

CompressibleAgent (experimental) can be used to handle long conversations. Notebook: https://github.com/microsoft/autogen/blob/main/notebook/agentchat_compression.ipynb

Have you looked at AICI by Microsoft yet?

https://github.com/microsoft/aici/

I have been planning to work on something like this. I think that eventually, someone will crack the "binary in -> good source code out of LLM" pipeline but we are probably a few years away from that still. I say a few years because I don't think there's a huge pile of money sitting at the end of this problem, but maybe I'm wrong.

A really good "stop-gap" approach would be to build a decompilation pipeline using Ghidra in headless mode and then combine the strict syntax correctness of a decompiler with the "intuition/system 1 skills" of an LLM. My inspiration for this setup comes from two recent advancements, both shared here on HN:

1. AlphaGeometry: The Decompiler and the LLM should complement each other, covering each other's weaknesses. https://deepmind.google/discover/blog/alphageometry-an-olymp...

2. AICI: We need a better way of "hacking" on top of these models, and being able to use something like AICI as the "glue" to coordinate the generation of C source. I don't really want the weights of my LLM to be used to generate syntactically correct C source, I want the LLM to think in terms of variable names, "snippet patterns" and architectural choices while other tools (Ghidra, LLVM) worry about the rest. https://github.com/microsoft/aici

Obviously this is all hand-wavey armchair commentary from a former grad student who just thinks this stuff is cool. Huge props to these researchers for diving into this. I know the authors already mentioned incorporating Ghidra into their future work, so I know they're on the right track.

We believe Guidance can run on top of AICI (we're working on efficient Earley parser for that [0], together with local Guidance folks). AICI is generally lower level (though our sample controllers are at similar level to Guidance).

[0] https://github.com/microsoft/aici/blob/main/controllers/aici...