Mia: You know, I've been messing around with AI lately, and sometimes it feels like they just, like, blurt out the first thing that comes to mind, right? Then I heard about this thing called CoRT – Chain of Recursive Thoughts. Sounds super sci-fi. But from what I gather, it’s basically making an AI argue with *itself* to come up with a better answer. Like an internal debate? Am I even close?
Mars: You’re totally on the right track. Think of it like… you know how chefs taste their own soup, tweak it, taste it again? CoRT is kinda like that, but for AI. It generates multiple versions of its answer, critiques them, and keeps the best one. It's like a tiny Iron Chef competition happening inside the AI's brain.
Mia: Wait, so it's both the chef *and* the judge? Doesn't that get… messy? Like, how does it know what's *actually* good?
Mars: Haha, it sounds confusing, I know! It's more like an internal debate club. It throws out an initial answer, then it thinks, “Okay, should I do this two or three more times?” That’s what they call 'dynamic thinking depth' - it figures out how deep to go on its own. Then, each time, it spits out, like, three alternative answers, judges them, and picks a winner. Rinse and repeat.
Mia: Sounds intense. How many rounds are we talking? Like, five? Ten? Is there a limit?
Mars: It really depends on how complicated the question is. If it’s something simple, one round might be enough. But if you’re asking it to, I don't know, debug some gnarly code, it might need five or more rounds until it’s happy with the answer. It's all about self-reflection.
Mia: And it actually works? Because sometimes I feel like AIs are just polite head-nodders, you know? Not exactly critical thinkers.
Mars: Totally. Someone tried this out on Mistral 3.1 - a pretty beefy model - and the results went from meh to whoa! Especially on things like programming, where those little off-by-one errors and missing semicolons can hide like ninjas. With CoRT, the AI could basically say, Hold on, let me double-check this.
Mia: Okay, interesting. So self-doubt is actually a *good* thing here. Got any real-world examples of this?
Mars: Sure. One team used CoRT to write investment reports. At first, the AI wrote just a boring summary, nothing special. But after a few rounds of arguing with itself, it pointed out some conflicting data, adjusted the risk factors, and wrote this way better, more detailed report. The investors actually noticed! No fluff, just solid thinking.
Mia: So, like having a friend whisper, Are you *sure* you wanna wear that? before you leave the house? A kind of AI fashion consultant?
Mars: Exactly! That’s self-evaluation in action. Plus, by coming up with multiple solutions, it forces itself to look at different angles. And with that iterative refinement, you get a polished final product instead of something half-baked.
Mia: I dig it. But what about speed? More thinking rounds means more time, right? Isn't that a drawback?
Mars: Yeah, it’s a trade-off. CoRT might be slower than getting an answer right away. But if being accurate is what matters most – like, say, with medical diagnoses or legal documents – those extra seconds or minutes are worth it. You'd rather have a slower, smarter AI than a fast, clueless one, right?
Mia: Totally makes sense. So, basically, CoRT turns an AI into its own harshest critic. It makes it come up with a bunch of ideas, fight them out, and pick the winner.
Mars: Exactly. It's all about self-argument, figuring out the right depth of thinking, and constantly improving the answer. Think of it as giving your AI its own little debate stage inside.
Mia: Gotcha. Next time I'm building a chatbot, I'm definitely having it argue with itself. Thanks for explaining all this!
Mars: Anytime! Let your AI wrestle with its own thoughts – it’s surprisingly helpful!