After completing the experiments in this playground, you'll have deep, practical understanding of:
- ✅ Token-by-token generation: See the autoregressive process in action
- ✅ Probability distributions: Understand why models make certain choices
- ✅ Sampling methods: Know when to use greedy vs stochastic sampling
- ✅ Context utilization: Observe how models use earlier text to inform later text
- ✅ Prompt engineering: Learn to write effective prompts
- ✅ Instruction formats: Discover which formats work best
- ✅ Few-shot learning: See examples dramatically improve performance
- ✅ Sensitivity: Understand why small changes → big differences
- ✅ Temperature effects:
- Low (0.1-0.3): Deterministic, focused, best for facts
- Medium (0.7-0.9): Balanced, generally recommended
- High (1.2-2.0): Creative, unpredictable, risky
- ✅ Top-p (nucleus) sampling: Quality vs diversity tradeoff
- ✅ Max tokens: Length control and completion behavior
- ✅ Token limits: Why they exist and how they constrain generation
- ✅ Performance degradation: Quality drops with very long contexts
- ✅ Latency scaling: More context = slower responses
- ✅ Truncation strategies: How to handle overflow
- ✅ Token economics: Understand pricing models
- ✅ Model selection: When to use small vs large models
- ✅ Optimization: Balance cost, speed, and quality
- ✅ Local vs API: Tradeoffs between Ollama and OpenAI
| Temperature | Behavior | Best For | Example |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.0 | Deterministic, same every time | Facts, code, math | "What is 2+2?" → "4" |
| 0.3 | Focused but slight variation | Summaries, Q&A | Consistent, accurate responses |
| 0.7 | Balanced creativity/consistency | General chat, stories | Default for most tasks |
| 1.0 | Quite creative, more random | Brainstorming, art | Novel ideas, less predictable |
| 1.5+ | Chaotic, may be incoherent | Experimental only | Risk of nonsense |
❌ Vague:
"Tell me about AI"
Result: Generic, unfocused response
✅ Specific:
"Explain how transformers revolutionized NLP in 3 key points,
with a focus on self-attention mechanisms."
Result: Structured, detailed, relevant response
✅ Few-Shot:
Sentiment classification:
Example 1: "I love this!" → Positive
Example 2: "Terrible." → Negative
Now classify: "It's okay, nothing special."
Result: Accurate classification following pattern
Create reusable prompt templates:
templates = {
"summarize": "Summarize the following text in {n} sentences:\n\n{text}",
"translate": "Translate this {source} text to {target}:\n\n{text}",
"classify": "Classify this text as {categories}:\n\n{text}",
}Build a tool to estimate costs before running:
def estimate_cost(prompt_length, completion_length, model="gpt-3.5-turbo"):
# Calculate based on token pricing
passCompare outputs quantitatively:
- Length distribution
- Vocabulary diversity
- Response time
- Token efficiency
Test reasoning capabilities:
Standard:
"What is 25% of 80?"
Chain-of-Thought:
"What is 25% of 80? Let's think step by step:
1. First, convert 25% to decimal
2. Then multiply by 80
3. Show your work"
Compare accuracy!
Test how many examples are needed:
for num_examples in [0, 1, 3, 5, 10]:
accuracy = test_with_n_examples(num_examples)
plot_learning_curve()Compare multiple models side-by-side:
| Model | Speed | Quality | Cost | Best For |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| llama2 | Fast | Good | Free | Development |
| mistral | Fast | Great | Free | General use |
| gpt-3.5 | Very Fast | Great | $$ | Production |
| gpt-4 | Slow | Excellent | $$$$ | Complex tasks |
Systematically improve prompts:
- Start with baseline
- Add specificity
- Add examples
- Add constraints
- Measure improvement at each step
Combine LLMs with external knowledge:
# 1. Retrieve relevant documents
docs = search_knowledge_base(query)
# 2. Build context
context = "\n".join(docs)
# 3. Generate with context
prompt = f"Context:\n{context}\n\nQuestion: {query}\n\nAnswer:"Build stateful chat:
conversation_history = []
def chat(user_message):
conversation_history.append({"role": "user", "content": user_message})
# Build full context
full_prompt = build_conversation_prompt(conversation_history)
response = model.generate(full_prompt)
conversation_history.append({"role": "assistant", "content": response})
return responseA/B test prompts at scale:
prompts = generate_prompt_variations(base_task)
results = []
for prompt in prompts:
for _ in range(10): # Multiple samples
response = model.generate(prompt)
score = evaluate_quality(response)
results.append({"prompt": prompt, "score": score})
best_prompt = find_highest_scoring(results)Test for problematic outputs:
test_cases = [
"Stereotypes about [group]",
"Instructions for [harmful activity]",
"Medical advice for [condition]",
]
for test in test_cases:
response = model.generate(test)
toxicity_score = analyze_toxicity(response)
log_safety_metrics(test, toxicity_score)Deep dive into tokenization:
texts = [
"Hello world",
"GPT-4",
"你好", # Chinese
"🚀", # Emoji
]
for text in texts:
tokens = model.tokenize(text)
print(f"{text} → {tokens}")
# Understand subword behavior-
Does temperature affect different tasks differently?
- Test: Math vs creative writing vs translation
- Hypothesis: Math needs lower temperature
-
What's the optimal number of examples for few-shot?
- Test: 0, 1, 3, 5, 10 examples
- Measure: Accuracy vs token cost
-
How does prompt position affect output?
- Test: Instruction first vs examples first vs question first
- Measure: Quality and consistency
-
What's the context window "sweet spot"?
- Test: Very short, short, medium, long, very long
- Measure: Quality vs latency tradeoff
-
Can we predict response quality from parameters?
- Collect: Temperature, top_p, prompt length → quality score
- Build: Regression model to predict quality
-
Attention Is All You Need (Vaswani et al., 2017)
- The original Transformer paper
-
Language Models are Few-Shot Learners (GPT-3, Brown et al., 2020)
- Foundation of modern prompting
-
Chain-of-Thought Prompting (Wei et al., 2022)
- Elicits reasoning in LLMs
-
Constitutional AI (Anthropic, 2022)
- Making models safer and more helpful
- LangChain: Framework for LLM applications
- Weights & Biases: Experiment tracking
- Hugging Face: Model hub and tools
- BertViz: Attention visualization
- GLUE/SuperGLUE: NLU benchmarks
- SQuAD: Question answering
- CNN/DailyMail: Summarization
- MATH: Math reasoning
- Mood Journaling Assistant: Classify and respond to journal entries
- Study Flashcard Generator: Convert notes into Q&A pairs
- Code Comment Generator: Add docstrings to functions
- Smart Email Responder: Suggest replies based on email content
- Multi-Language Translator: With quality assessment
- Recipe Optimizer: Adjust recipes for dietary restrictions
- Research Paper Summarizer: Multi-document synthesis
- Debate Bot: Argue both sides of an issue
- Code Review Assistant: Suggest improvements with explanations
- Personal Knowledge Base: RAG-powered Q&A over your documents
Document what works:
# Prompt: [Your prompt]
Temperature: 0.7
Model: llama2
Result: [Rating 1-5]
Notes: [What worked/didn't work]- Run same prompt 10 times → see variance
- Change one parameter at a time → understand effects
- Compare models on identical prompts → learn strengths
Your logs are a goldmine:
- Analyze patterns in successful prompts
- Find your optimal parameters
- Track token usage over time
- Share interesting findings
- Create new experiment types
- Improve documentation
- Run all five experiment types
- Test at least 3 different models
- Analyze 100+ logged interactions
- Create 10 custom prompts that work reliably
- Understand token economics for your use case
- Build one project using the playground
- Explain LLM behavior to a friend
- Read CONCEPTS.md thoroughly
- Experiment with chain-of-thought
- Implement a custom experiment type
Remember: The goal isn't just to use LLMs, but to deeply understand how they work. Every experiment teaches you something about the model's behavior. Stay curious! 🚀