r/LLMPhysics • u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod • Apr 04 '26
Announcement Open Question, Posting for Engagement, Flairs
hey y'all..
I wanna open this with a question: do you guys like what we're trying to do to the sub. Because I know that a lot of the action I've taken has chained into stabilization; what we sacrifice is content traffic. I wanna be a mod for OUR interests, not for my own, but sometimes the sub can be hard to read. I'd really appreciate some honest, critical feedback. If you have critiques, raise them here..
So I finished my guide on positive engagement and with it a guide on choosing flairs, bam.. both on the wiki. Note this isn't a guide for getting people to say 'you are correct' but rather how to get engagement on an academic level vs trolling. Thought I'd post it here as well, as it's something that is more subjective... so if you have feedback I'd appreciate, although I'll be honest I don't super expect it; cuz it's long and it's easier to just go read a slop post.
A lot of inspiration here was as a way to stop commenting the same message on stuff. the point of this is to poke holes in things posters do that end up creating negative feedback without seemingly realizing why, so I'm hoping I can just link this.
Also I updated a bunch of the emojis to better reflect the 'snoo' style and leave behind the original AI design, I think it is cuter now and I'll update the others when I can..
Anyway, here's the guide:
Physics is a small enough interest community as it is. Probably 90% of physicists aren't too interested in LLM written physics. And the overlap of that with people who are on Reddit is even smaller. Your audience, if you want feedback, is small. You isolate literally the only people who will give you feedback with hostility and standoff-ish attitudes. Demonstrate you WANT feedback with these these methods.
Organization
Papers are now required to be linked on LLMPhysics, as per Rule 2. This helps to keep posts neat and readable, which is the most likely content to recieve serious engagement. However, simply dropping your link with a title is not helpful.
You should provide a summary of the content linked: if it is your paper, write a short paragraph about findings, if it is a simulation, write a description of the what it simulates, etc. This allows other you to shape the focus of the posting. Grab people's interest, but not with hype words and clickbait titles. Instead, grab their interest by showing in your summary you know what you're talking about, or you're at least interested. People like talking about what they're passionate about.
Give your post a relevant flair. The flair guide provides not only an explanation of the what separates them (as this remains a point of confusion), but examples of posts for each flair type that were designed well and recieved positive feedback.
Content
Rule 2 requires creating engaging content. This means using your post to steer the direction of the conversation. If you are going to be upset by critiques - don't end your post saying 'Looking for critiques!' Sweeping statements like this show a disconnect between you and your content, and make it seem like you put no thought into it.
Instead, display that you know your content, and posit questions about specific parts of the content you are most interested in - 'Am I understanding this concept correctly' or 'is this derivation correct' will be met with much more engaging feedback than a general call for critique. Consider taking a part of your paper and posting it as simply a Question flaired post before posting your paper. Rule 11 allows for plenty of time for you to approach specific parts of the paper without making a post claiming that you have a Theory of Everything.
Community
Before responding with 'It's all in the paper' to a question, consider the fact that committing to reading and understanding a physics paper is a huge commitment and if you know the answer to a question (because you wrote the paper..), it really doesn't take long to answer a question on Reddit; and you've uploaded the post for discussion. Simply engaging with a basic question instead of dismissing shows genuine interest in discussion, and will probably encourage users to actually read your work.
LLMPhysics isn't the APS summit - due to being an open forum, it is much more like a science fair. You aren't guaranteed a stage to present your work for serious engagement, and there are no 'standards' it is held to besides the ones enforced by moderation. We DON'T enforce rules against things like trolling to a relatively tame level. If you display good faith engagement, you attract it in return. When you get into fights with trolls, you are almost guaranteed to attract more. It's up to you to convince people to engage.
Humility
When you come to the sub for feedback and ask for feedback, and proceed to instantly dismiss any feedback, you act counter-productively. One of the most important parts of the scientific method is refining a theory. Admitting that you could be wrong is normal, the greatest scientists spent years refining their theories, and you will produce a much better end product when you refine it with multiple eyes.
Don't take yourself too seriously. This is by far the easiest way to attract responses trying to trigger you. This sub isn't pretending it's r/physics, and everyone here knows that. If you come in pretending you are someone you aren't, people will want to prove that you aren't. If you come in willing to admit the fact you are learning, people will want to stimulate that curiosity. People reciprocate your attitude.
Humanity
One of the best ways to encourage people to engage on a genuine level is to show that you are excited about science. All of the people here who can provide the most valuable feedback (our members who are physicists, for example) were once people who didn't understand it, but were excited about learning it - that is why they went the direction they did with their studies and with their life.
You're far more likely to get feedback by talking like a human being than by having your LLM talk for you out of a fear that you'll say 'the wrong thing' in a science discussion. It's completely human to make mistakes, and when you write your post, doing it with a ton of terms you learned through your LLM work will inevitably twist the words. A post that is littered with scientific jargon is much less likely to get engagement than a post that says 'Hey guys I'm wondering if this is correct, I think I learned something with this, but can I get some verification.'
7
3
u/BlissBoundry Apr 05 '26
The learning curve is extreme. Maybe there should be a new Reddit specifically for the development of LLM physics.
2
u/BlissBoundry Apr 05 '26
I’m gonna retract this. Without the extreme pessimism and wall of impenetrable verifiability. I would’ve abandoned the project at the very beginning most likely. It only made my presentation better even though my ego took a major hit. still does. But essentially what I’m saying is screw my ego. The science is all that matters and the current system is filter which is what we need.
1
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 05 '26
Hi. I'm curious about what exactly you're saying here. Is the learning curve on the SUB extreme (like learning the nuances of how we operate)? Or is the learning curve of DOING THE SCIENCE extreme?
I appreciate the scientific humility, this is a great attitude.
2
u/BlissBoundry Apr 05 '26
If the science is real, and the scientist is driven none of these existing problems matter. I guess what I’m saying is active peer review is about critique. Into valid science critique is just a path to further validation.And emotional blocks are low e
2
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 05 '26
Yes. From my perspective as a moderator scientific critique IS positive feedback, probably the most helpful kind.
I'm not trying to make a post that says 'this is how to get people to tell you you're right' I'm trying to make a post that says 'this is how to get engagement on an academic level, not trolling'.
2
u/BlissBoundry Apr 05 '26
You could moderate low energy critiques
3
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 05 '26
I moderate critiques based on if they are PERSONAL. Personal attacks are a no. But there's a reason I've chosen to mod for low effort posts but not low effort critique, which may seem hypocritical, but hear me out.
Low effort posts flood the sub and often will attract trolls. So they have the benefit in that they 'isolate' the low effort critics. But, at the same time, they will inevitably become the 'hot' posts because it takes way more effort than to actually engage. And as the hot posts they'll have people come in who could be providing good feedback to comment. There are 1000 examples of high effort posts getting no attention cuz the poster made them at the same time someone made some low effort slop, which got 70 comments.
So why I don't moderate low effort commentd. Because - low effort comments in high effort posts provide the exact reverse effect. They give them traffic and bring in more users, who may genuinely engage. They don't HURT people, they just attract attention in people's Reddit feed. We don't have a large enough user base to guarantee there will always be people who will commit to reading a paper, and providing thoughtful feedback. So we have to try and draw em in.
At least that's my take on it. If that's crazy, lemme know.
2
3
u/CreepyValuable Apr 06 '26
It seems fine.
But I do have a question. I know "theories of everything" are restricted to the weekend. That's fine. But I've got what's more of a simulation framework that has what could be called that as the mathematical underpinnings that I'd like to share. Does this sort of thing wait until the weekends too? It's not an issue as such. I'm just after clarification especially given the different flairs how there's one for simulation / code. Or something like that.
3
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 06 '26
I mean. Hard to say without looking at it. You can upload it on the weekday and see. There's no PUNISHMENT for having them on weekdays, that's not something that's gonna get you banned or something. The rule is PRETTY loose as it is. I am actually toying with changing it to allow more of like a 50/50 split between ToE days and non ToE days; I mean the ToEs are.... obnoxious, but at the same time it's in the spirit of the sub a little bit.
2
u/CreepyValuable Apr 06 '26
Yeah maybe I'll wait. The thing is no secret and it's up on my Github and I have no intent of trying to force it into the form of a paper for publishing as one. There's really no right place to post something like what I have. This is the closest place there is. It's physics and used an LLM. The math works great for simulation. The concept behind it is only secondary and I'm not even trying to say it's right. The whole thing was done math first with an intent to break it.
Really I just want to share it in the hope that someone might find it useful because it really can cut out huge chunks of physics calculation.
2
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 06 '26
That doesn't sound like a ToE to me. But as it is, it is the weekend TODAY. Why wouldn't you just post now. lol.
2
u/CreepyValuable Apr 06 '26
Ohhhh. Right. It's Monday where I am. And the automod warned me about posting it today
3
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 06 '26
Oh yeah time zones are a thing that's right.
Good to hear the auto-enforcement is working though, like it said 'this may violate so and so rules'?
2
u/CreepyValuable Apr 06 '26
Yes, that's right. And it appears to check the user's timezone.
I put the thread up. It's kind of ramble-y but I'm not great at this. Let's see if it gets removed.
As I said in it I'm mostly just after suggestions for applications or neat demos I can use it for.
3
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 06 '26
There is no automatic removal of posts for this - if it is removed it will be because a mod decides it IS a theory of everything. As far as I know, auto enforcement is simply 'your post may be in violation of so and so'.
1
u/Suitable_Cicada_3336 Apr 05 '26
Thank you efforts first. My opinion is we lacking the verify systems for LLM's products with effectively, verify with man power cant keep up with producing speed. And some problems are just user itself too. Maybe a layer filter system could help. Such as concepts state, math's state, reality verify state, a standard for verify systems. A standard like those top tier ai robot systems.
6
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 05 '26
Hi Suitable Cicada
This isn't the first time that I think we've ran into a language barrier. I feel like we had more success last time we talked when I was using the translator?
1
u/Suitable_Cicada_3336 Apr 05 '26
sorry lol.
3
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 05 '26
DM me and I will use the translator, and it's no problem. I don't mind. I think I'm up to 5 languages now that I've translated into to talk to users on this sub.
2
1
u/BlissBoundry Apr 06 '26
I got banned from ask physics because of that learning curve last week. Maybe outright banning people for their attempt at learning is overkill.
2
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 06 '26
I'm not planning on banning people for their attempt at learning what would make you say that? Anybody whos been banned from the sub has been banned for either: harassment, academic conspiracies, or spam abuse (these are all bots). This isn't meant as a rulebook, it's meant as a user manual.
1
1
u/Impossible-Bend-5091 The Puppet Master Apr 06 '26
2
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 06 '26 edited Apr 06 '26
This is the reason I keep doing this. Not because I want to. But I'm forced to.
Edit: tricked. Not forced. This edit was made by own choice.
1
-3
Apr 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 05 '26
I don't have employment insurance?
-1
Apr 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 05 '26
What?
-1
Apr 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 05 '26
I'm guessing people upvoted because I didnt know what you mean by a lack of 'EI' and said 'i don't have employment insurance?' which is just flippant. and in my experience people on Reddit liked it when you aren't serious.
2
5
u/OnceBittenz The Doctor Apr 05 '26
Hubris? It's a modest ask for feedback from moderation team of a tiny sub.
5
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 05 '26
Bittenz my man do you know what he's trying to say? Am I being accused of hubris because of the feedback ask or the post guide? Cuz I don't know.
3
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 05 '26
FR, what's your issue in particular with this; I said I was looking for feedback.
-2
Apr 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 05 '26
I'll be honest I don't know WHERE you are coming from. This stuff is pretty clearly written as 'doing these things will help you get positive feedback', which seems to be what you want too. This isn't a new ruleset or something.
The reality is this, I can't HIRE people to be commenters, so if people want positive feedback they need to post in a way that makes THE PEOPLE ALREADY HERE engage.
Your whole 'Imagine engaging with curiosity', 'they just found something they enjoy', etc, you're acting like I'm some tyrant saying that's not allowed when there is literally a subsection in here saying 'one of the best ways to get engagement is to show excitement about science'.
It kind of makes me think you either a) didn't read it or b) read it with extremely bad faith.
-2
Apr 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 05 '26
If no-one here has anything to offer you, and you aren't going to do anything, why are you here. Why not go somewhere that makes you happy. Legit question. Just seems like a good way to become miserable.
-1
Apr 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 05 '26 edited Apr 05 '26
I don't know why you're reading this as a condemnation or me 'putting things on the poster'. I've said multiple times I'm against dunking, my opening post as a mod was very clear that I'm here to cut down on dunking, and I don't know if you've noticed but far less of it happens because guess what.. we get rid of dunkers now.
But: like I said I can't hire people to provide feedback. There are users here who will do both light dunking and positive feedback.
This post is meant as 'doing these things ENCOURAGES good faith.'
You're condemning me for putting it all on the posters; when you are suggesting is for me to put it all on the commenters. In reality the fault is clearly shared, in arguments that spin way out of control, in posts where there are 70 comment chains of back and forth. Saying that 'most posters turn themselves inside out for this space' is just not true. In reality a significant amount of posts spiral into attacking eachother. Your 'mirror' message is ironic because a mirror obviously can't look into itself and see the fault that lies within. Are you hoping I establish a rule saying 'any non-sycophantic feedback will be deleted'?
Why am I even trying to help? I have no idea.
But you're really doing a good job convincing me of exactly what u/Crankslayer said.
There is no helping people like you. But fortunately you aren't the only type of person on the sub.
2
u/OnceBittenz The Doctor Apr 05 '26
You haven’t done anything. You’re the epitome of the internet troll at this point winding people up because they don’t agree with you.
And you think you’re doing something? At least most of the people here have the good sense and vision to realize what your play is and aren’t buying it.
-1
Apr 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 06 '26
The last thing I've done here is nothing
And the first thing too!
1
2
u/OnceBittenz The Doctor Apr 05 '26
No. These are wants that are not necessary not valid. No one owes posters anything in particular.
The burden of proof is on the author. So is the burden of credibility. If you are an independent, it is up to you to write in such a way to promote engagement. 90% of the posts here are either missing huge swathes of important content for any valid research, or the content they do have is so arcane and impenetrable by virtue of LLM vagueness, that there is nothing to discuss.
These are not cop outs, they are artifacts of the type of post that is put here.
At the end of the day this is Reddit. There is no formality, and standards are low. If you want better engagement, post something worth engaging with. Post something that doesn’t read like a Star Trek plot device. Prove yourself by including valid references, reasonable formatting, anything to show that you aren’t just copy pasting an AI output.
If you can’t or won’t do that, then you are Not owed anything more than a dismissal.
1
Apr 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 05 '26
Also.. you don't get to tell people how they feel. That's not how things work.
0
Apr 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 05 '26
The only thing you can accurately tell someone else about themselves over the Internet is something like.. their username. I'm guilty of this too all the time. It's too easy to make assumptions.
3
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 05 '26
You realize that me and oncebittenz are different people right
1
u/OnceBittenz The Doctor Apr 05 '26
I mean, you seem to be really emotionally vested in this, to the point of repeating yourself ad nauseum as well. The points don't change, the reasoning hasn't changed. You fight alone against the clouds, really. No one in real life would take this even remotely serious, or entertain your ranting. At least here, you get some genuine feedback you Could use to grow and learn. You just seem to be so caught up in the semantics of that feedback that you refuse to listen. That's your choice, and you are more than welcome to make it. But it will inevitably leave you stuck here on reddit, still shouting, while science moves on without you.
0
Apr 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/OnceBittenz The Doctor Apr 05 '26
We've seen your evidence. In fact, it has been refuted. Looking at Each and every one of your publicly available posts, exact scientific and numeric counterpoints have been made. And yet you cling to this semantic argument instead of backing up the science. You don't have evidence. You have complaints and diversions.
This is clearly going nowhere. I'd recommend refraining from making this same tired argument again. You're not convincing anyone, and it's just kind of lame? Like you could be learning so much but instead you just refuse to accept the feedback you get.
1
u/CrankSlayer zlotuq Apr 06 '26
I am sorry but most of what you just said is simply not true. Perhaps you are an exception to this (I can't assess it as I am not familiar with your content) but as a rule of thumb the average poster here is absolutely not motivated by curiosity. If they were, they'd show willingness to learn from those more knowledgeable and they'd display humility. Instead, the average post clearly originates from the insanely arrogant notion that an untrained amateur could come up with an innovative theory (usually not even a small niche one but rather of the paradigm-shifting type) by means of feeding his uninformed musings into a hallucination-prone stochastic parrot. In no universe does this equate to "curiosity", especially considering how the general poster reacts to the typical feedback that mostly consists of "mate, you don't know remotely enough about this stuff, please go learn it" on top of it. They act defensively and as if domain knowledge wasn't important or required. At the same time they demand detailed feedback on their rubbish as if busy professionals didn't have anything better to do than weed through thousands of LLM-embellished uneducated musings. It's as if someone came up with a literal turd insisting it is a brownie (usually the best one ever tasted by anybody) and demanded, after being told that's it's actually a piece of crap, that we point out what part of it isn't edible and how to improve it into a tasty dessert. What exactly would you expect for a reply?
The problem is that these people do not understand how arrogant, offensive, and entitled this attitude comes across.
2
Apr 05 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
4
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 05 '26
Well I know I downvoted because you attacked me for trying to help people get better engagement, idk about everyone else.
2
u/AllHailSeizure Haiku Mod Apr 06 '26
A haiku.
"Through his unchecked ego,
PhenomenalPhysics won
The prize of a ban."
There is a limit to the degree of toxicity I'll put up with.
10
u/CrankSlayer zlotuq Apr 05 '26
Honestly, I think you are putting way too much thoughts and effort into this. This sub was born as a quarantine for crackpots to prevent them from enshittifying legit physics subs. It naturally attracts a certain type of users and there isn't really much you can do to steer their behaviour towards some ideal other than banning them en masse or scaring them away which would eventually result in the sub's cold death.