langchain VS AutoGPT

Langchain and the implementation of Custom Tools also is a great (and very efficient) way to setup a dedicated Q&A (for example for chat purpose) agent.

We're using it via langchain talking to Amazon Bedrock which is hosting Claude 1.x. It's comparable to GPT3.x, not bad. The integration doesn't seem to be fully there though, I think langchain is expecting "Human:" and "AI:", but Claude uses "Assistant:".

https://github.com/hwchase17/langchain/issues/2638

Depending on how much work you want to put into it, you can get started at HuggingFace with their models and datasets, but you'd need compute power, multiple MLOps, etc. I was introduced to the concept in this video, since Google has their Vertex AI tools on Google Cloud, and there's always LangChain but I'm not sure about anything recent.

a documentation chatbot proof of concept using GPT3.5 and LangChain

I encourage everyone to pay attention to the Langchain open-source project and leverage it to achieve tasks that ChatGPT cannot handle.

Yeah I never know where memory goes exactly in langchain, it's not exactly clear all the time. But sure, the main insight I remember is this, take a look at their MULTI_PROMPT_ROUTER_TEMPLATE: https://github.com/hwchase17/langchain/blob/560c4dfc98287da1...

It's a lot of instructions for an LLM, they seem to forget an LLM is an auto-completion machine, and which data it is trained on. Using <<>> for sections is not a normal thing, it's not markdown, which probably the thing read way more often on the internet, instead of open json comments, why not type signatures, instead of so many rules, why not give it examples? It is an autocomplete machine!

They are relying too much on the LLM being smart because they probably only test stuff in GPT-4 and 3.5, but with GPT4All models this prompt was not working at all, so I had to rewrite it, for simple routing, we don't even need json, carying the `next_inputs` here is weird if you don't need it.

So this is my version of it: https://gist.github.com/rogeriochaves/b67676977eebb1936b9b5c...

It's so basic it's dumb, yet it is more powerful, as it does not rely on GPT-4 level intelligence, it's just what I needed

Define agency. Does AutoGPT or BabyAGI fit the definition?

This leap is evident in projects like BabyAGI and AutoGPT, showcasing how such agents can prioritize and execute tasks based on a pre-defined objective and the results of previous actions, such as sales prospecting or ordering pizza.

A system and a user message are constructed from the task given by the user in code and passed to the LLM as input.

A: How much do you know? If you can easily read code (in this example Python, but this will still benefit anyone who can read code), you should check out Auto-GPT. If you are looking to explore different options, check out this doc on AI Agents.

Also I think most agents I have seen have implemented some form of long-short term memory. Why does it say autogpt doesnt support it? https://github.com/Significant-Gravitas/Auto-GPT/tree/master/autogpts/autogpt/autogpt/memory

In my newest experiment, I try out MetaGPT, which is supposed to be better than AutoGPT according to MetaGPT's paper.

In my opinion the most interesting Agents: Auto-GPT Github: https://github.com/Significant-Gravitas/Auto-GPT BabyAGI Github: https://github.com/yoheinakajima/babyagi Voyager Github: https://github.com/MineDojo/Voyager / Paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2305.16291 I would also add: ChemCrow: Augmenting large-language models with chemistry tools Github: https://github.com/ur-whitelab/chemcrow-public/ Paper: https://arxiv.org/abs/2304.05376

Check out the new Re-Arch README and ARCHITECTURE_NOTES.