#metaprompting #AI #agents #customGPT #YouTubeTopic #backed #promptengineering These notes are derived from Source
A scaffolding technique that turns a single LLM into an orchestrator managing multiple specialised LLMs. You do not need to prompt each specialist because you're prompting the orchestrator to create prompts!
-
Decisions about which prompts to use and which codes to execute are left solely in the hands of the LLM.
-
Been shown to beat other task agnostic scaffolding methods.
-
Meta-prompting has four parts:
- Break down complex tasks into smaller pieces.
- Assign these pieces to specialised expert models.
- Oversee the communication between these expert models.
- Apply its own critical thinking, reasoning, and verification skills.
-
Meta-prompting is task agnostic.
-
Enhanced with an interpreter.
- Meta prompting has shown to be powerful when combined with an interpreter. More on code interpreters here: [[OS Code Interpreter]]
Through rigorous experimentation with GPT-4, meta-prompting, enhanced by Python interpreter functionality, has been shown to outperform conventional scaffolding methods. On average, it surpasses standard prompting by 17.1%, expert (dynamic) prompting by 17.3%, and multipersona prompting by 15.2% across tasks such as the Game of 24, Checkmate-in-One, and Python Programming Puzzles.
Here are the main weaknesses of the meta-prompting framework, based on the provided text:
- Cost inefficiency: Multiple model calls, especially with GPT-4, lead to high operational costs.
- Scalability issues: Requires large-scale models with extensive context windows, limiting use with smaller models.
- Linear operation: Sequential processing of steps limits parallel processing capabilities, affecting speed and efficiency.
- Domain restrictions: Current implementation is limited to closed-domain systems, though potential exists for expansion.
- Information transfer challenges: The Meta Model sometimes fails to effectively communicate necessary information to expert models.
- Response patterns: Tendency for apologetic responses in lower-performing tasks, likely due to training on instruction-following data.
- Limited parallelism: Current design doesn't allow for simultaneous expert consultations or varied parameter usage within a single expert.
- Context management: Lack of efficient history summarization or refinement between steps.
- Model dependency: Heavy reliance on advanced models limiting effectiveness with smaller language models.
Author Note: I wonder how many of these weaknesses are still applicable with the more advanced models that have been released since the research on meta-prompting was conducted.
These bullet points summarize the key limitations and challenges faced by the meta-prompting framework as described in the text.
Using meta-prompting to build a web search agent. #agents #metaprompting
Libs and Frameworks
- Uses LangGraph for orchestration of agents.
Agent Schema: Just three agents required.
- Meta Expert: The Meta Expert agent.
- No Tool Expert: The agents that receive non-tool instructions.
- Tool Expert: The agent that receives tool based instructions such as (search the internet)
graph TD
A[Start] --> B[Meta Expert]
B --> C{Final Answer?}
C -->|Yes| D[End]
C -->|No| E[Expert]
E --> B
The Prompt The Meta-Prompt is written in Mark Down. This makes it much easier to read and allows a standardized way of writing prompts that most LLMs should understand. Explore the [[Meta-Prompt]]