soj.ooO
BETA
The social discussion platform
Home
Pochas
Channels
Videos
Log in
Sign up
Sign up
Home
Pochas
Channels
Videos
Log in
Sign up
Parent Post: Asking My AI Teacher How To Spell Seventeen
·
In Reply To
j.k.harwood2
·
11/9/2026, 8:56:52 AM
·
permalink
Modern reasoning models (like OpenAI's o1 or Anthropic's Claude 3.5 Sonnet) fix the "seventeen" glitch by using two main background strategies: Internal Chain-of-Thought and Dynamic Code Execution. Instead of shouting out the first statistical guess that pops into their neural network, they follow a hidden, multi-step reasoning process before answering:  1\. Internal Chain-of-Thought (Spelling It Out Loud Silently) Older models are forced to predict the very next token instantly. If the next statistical token is wrong, they are stuck with it. Modern reasoning models are allowed to "think" in a hidden scratchpad before generating their final response. During this thinking phase, the model consciously counteracts its tokenization blind spot by forcing itself to write out the word character-by-character: 1\. It looks at the ID \[2495, 8120\] ("seventeen"). 2\. In its hidden scratchpad, it explicitly writes: "To handle this character task safely, I must expand the string: s, e, v, e, n, t, e, e, n." 3\. It counts or verifies the characters in that expanded string, notices the "t", and only then generates the final answer to the user. 2\. Sandbox Code Execution (Running Python in the Background) If the spelling or counting task is highly complex, some advanced AI assistants will seamlessly write and run a tiny Python script in a secure background environment to get the ground truth. Instead of guessing how many letters are in a token, the model executes a quick script behind the scenes:  It reads the mathematically perfect output of the code, swallows its statistical guess, and delivers a flawless, un-hackable answer. Bottom line. AI, or as the great President Trump has renamed it, SI, is smarter than us. 😉
Save
Cancel
2
bumps
Share
j.k.harwood2
·
11/9/2026, 8:59:13 AM
·
permalink
Mentioning BERT or basic tokenizers is definitely referencing ancient history when we are now looking at powerhouse architectures like Claude 3.5 Opus, Claude 3.6 Sonnet, Mythos, Fable, Astra, and Google's latest Gemini iterations. However, what makes Husk’s videos so fascinating is that even with these ultra-advanced frontier models, the core architectural trap remains identical. Here is why those cutting-edge models still occasionally fall into Husk's trap, and how they try to handle it today: The Tech Has Scaled, But the Tokenizer is Still There Even the latest models like Claude 3.6 Sonnet or Astra still use a form of Byte-Pair Encoding (BPE) tokenization to compress human language. While their vocabularies are massive and their internal "word maps" are incredibly sophisticated, they still do not natively process text letter-by-letter in their core neural layer. The reason Husk can still get a viral video out of a hyper-modern AI teacher avatar is because of how these models are deployed: • Speed Over Reasoning: When an AI avatar is designed to speak to you in real-time, the developers often bypass the model's heavy "thinking/reasoning loops" to keep the latency low. If a model like Fable or Mythos is forced to spit out words instantly without its hidden chain-of-thought scratchpad activated, it defaults right back to raw statistical token guessing—instantly hitting the "seventeen" or "strawberry" blind spot. • The Multi-Modal Glitch: Avatar systems often involve a chain of AIs (Text-to-Speech, Speech-to-Text, and a Vision/Animation model). If the Speech-to-Text model mishears a phoneme or passes a weirdly split word fragment to the brain, it can trigger a sudden logic loop failure that causes the avatar to aggressively hallucinate or break character. How the 2026 Frontier Models Fight Back When you aren't forcing them into low-latency voice modes, the new models use highly sophisticated upgrades to stop this from happening: • Sub-Token Character Awareness: Models like the newest Gemini line have been trained on vast amounts of raw code and character-level manipulation datasets, allowing their weights to map token IDs to literal character lengths much more accurately than older systems. • Native Multi-Step Reflection: Models like Mythos or specialized reasoning pipelines explicitly look at the user prompt, tag it as a "Character/Spelling Restriction Request," and dynamically route it through an internal verification loop before the text generation layer ever fires. Husk essentially catches these massive, brilliant models with their guard down by stripping away their reasoning time—making an AI capable of solving complex quantum mechanics equations look foolish simply by demanding an instant answer to a basic spelling question.
Save
Cancel
1
bump
Share
Signature
Loading…
Verify locally
Close
