Post #3254182
2026-06-06 23:11 UTC
@orionkidder@writing.exchange @grammargirl@zirk.us I’ve heard the Spanish science communicator Ignacio Crespo argue that “hallucination” is misleading in this context, because it imports a human mental-state metaphor into a statistical text-generation error. “Confabulation” may be closer: a plausible-sounding reconstruction that fills gaps. Still, it also comes from human cognition, so it can anthropomorphise the model too.
Replies (1)
-
@danielmunoz@maly.io 2026-06-06 23:14
@orionkidder@writing.exchange @grammargirl@zirk.us I think the deeper problem with “hallucination” is that it imports a human mental-state metaphor into a statistical text-generation error. That can make people expect obviously bizarre output, when the real danger is often confident, plausible-sounding falsehoods. “Confabulation” has a similar problem, though. But, I don’t know, it sounds better to me.