pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.22211 · v1 · pith:TYW6GG5Znew · submitted 2026-06-20 · 💻 cs.HC

Open AI in the Wild: Adoption and Adaptation of Open Models on r/LocalLLaMA

Woohyeuk Lee , James Howison , Min Kyung Lee , Hanlin Li This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 11:24 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 💻 cs.HC
keywords open AI modelscommunity practicesthematic analysislocal LLMsAI adoptionReddit communitymodel customizationusability constraints
0
0 comments X

The pith

Users in r/LocalLLaMA conceptualize openness in AI models through practical concerns like local control, privacy, and adaptation under hardware and licensing limits.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper studies how people actually adopt and adapt open foundation models by analyzing discussions in the r/LocalLLaMA online community. It shows that openness is judged by whether models deliver reliability, user control, and customization despite constraints on compute, licenses, and ease of use. This pragmatic lens explains why users choose open models for autonomy and experimentation while avoiding closed platforms, and why community-shared tools and datasets keep the ecosystem going. If the claim holds, technical definitions of open AI alone miss what matters to real users and how innovation actually spreads.

Core claim

Through thematic analysis of community discussions, the authors establish that members conceptualize openness pragmatically in relation to reliability, local control, privacy, and the ability to adapt models under constraints such as compute resources, licensing, and usability. Motivations include autonomy, experimentation, and resistance to platform instability, while deterrents include steep learning curves and performance gaps. Shared community resources such as datasets, evaluation frameworks, and inference tools sustain interdependent development beyond single model releases.

What carries the argument

Thematic analysis of r/LocalLLaMA discussions, which surfaces a utility-oriented view of openness tied to practical constraints and community resources.

If this is right

  • Open model producers can better support sustained use by improving downstream usability and infrastructure.
  • A utility-oriented view of openness shifts focus from release practices alone to how models perform under real constraints.
  • Community projects such as shared datasets and tools form an interdependent layer that extends beyond individual model releases.
  • Adoption grows when models align with needs for autonomy and resistance to platform changes.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same pragmatic framing may appear in other open-source software communities facing similar resource limits.
  • Designers of new open AI platforms could test features that directly address local control and privacy to increase adoption.
  • Policy discussions on AI openness might incorporate user-reported constraints rather than relying only on technical checklists.

Load-bearing premise

Thematic analysis of discussions on r/LocalLLaMA accurately captures how the community conceptualizes openness without major effects from sampling bias or researcher interpretation.

What would settle it

A direct survey of r/LocalLLaMA members or comparable open-model communities that finds primary emphasis on technical release criteria instead of pragmatic factors like local control and privacy.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.22211 by Hanlin Li, James Howison, Min Kyung Lee, Woohyeuk Lee.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Flowchart of data processing, training, sampling, and thematic analysis [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Index page of the Qualitative Coding Tool [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Qualitative coding interface for threads of comments. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p033_3.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

Existing work on AI openness has focused on defining what technical components or release practices qualify a system as "open". However, less is known about how openness is understood and put into practice by people who adopt and adapt these models under real-world constraints. In this paper, we present an empirical study of r/LocalLLaMA, a large online community centered on running and customizing open foundation models locally. Through thematic analysis of community discussions, we find that members conceptualize openness pragmatically - in relation to reliability, local control, privacy, and the ability to adapt models under constraints such as compute resources, licensing, and usability. We identify key motivations for adopting open models, including autonomy, experimentation, and resistance to platform instability, as well as deterrents such as steep learning curves and performance gaps compared to closed systems. We further describe how shared resources and projects, including datasets, evaluation frameworks, and inference tools, sustain interdependent development in the broader open AI ecosystem beyond individual model releases. We then discuss the implications of a utility-oriented view of openness, and how producer support for downstream usability and infrastructure could better enable sustained innovation in open model ecosystems.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. The paper reports a qualitative empirical study of the r/LocalLLaMA subreddit, using thematic analysis of community discussions to examine how users adopt and adapt open foundation models under real-world constraints. It claims that community members conceptualize openness pragmatically in terms of reliability, local control, privacy, and adaptability under limits of compute, licensing, and usability; identifies motivations such as autonomy, experimentation, and resistance to platform instability along with deterrents like learning curves and performance gaps; and describes the role of shared datasets, evaluation frameworks, and inference tools in sustaining interdependent development. The paper concludes with implications for how producers might better support downstream usability to enable sustained open-model innovation.

Significance. If the thematic analysis holds, the work supplies grounded, user-centered evidence on openness that moves beyond purely technical definitions of model release practices. Its strength lies in drawing directly from an active online community rather than abstract theorizing, yielding concrete observations about pragmatic trade-offs and ecosystem interdependencies that could inform HCI and AI governance research on sustainable open ecosystems.

major comments (1)
  1. [Abstract] Abstract (and presumed Methods section): the description of the thematic analysis provides no information on the sampling frame, number of threads or posts examined, coding procedure, or inter-rater reliability checks. Because the central claim—that members conceptualize openness in terms of reliability, local control, privacy, and adaptation under constraints—rests entirely on the validity of this analysis, the absence of these details leaves open the possibility that reported themes reflect thread selection, self-selection among posters, or researcher framing rather than community views.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their positive evaluation of the paper's contribution and for the detailed feedback on methodological transparency. We address the single major comment below and will revise the manuscript accordingly.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract] Abstract (and presumed Methods section): the description of the thematic analysis provides no information on the sampling frame, number of threads or posts examined, coding procedure, or inter-rater reliability checks. Because the central claim—that members conceptualize openness in terms of reliability, local control, privacy, and adaptation under constraints—rests entirely on the validity of this analysis, the absence of these details leaves open the possibility that reported themes reflect thread selection, self-selection among posters, or researcher framing rather than community views.

    Authors: We agree that the manuscript requires additional detail on data collection and analysis to support the validity of the thematic findings. The current version describes the overall approach at a high level but does not include the specific elements noted. In the revised manuscript we will expand the Methods section to report: the sampling frame and selection criteria for threads from r/LocalLLaMA, the total number of threads and posts examined, a step-by-step account of the coding procedure (including initial code generation, theme development, and iteration), and the measures taken to ensure analytical rigor. Regarding inter-rater reliability, we will explicitly state that the analysis followed a reflexive thematic analysis orientation (Braun & Clarke) conducted by a single researcher with reflexive practices; we will describe how trustworthiness was addressed through iterative memoing, peer discussion of emerging themes, and an audit trail rather than multi-coder reliability statistics. These additions will be placed in a dedicated subsection and will directly mitigate concerns about selection effects or researcher framing. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: purely empirical qualitative study with no derivations or fitted inputs.

full rationale

This paper presents a thematic analysis of external Reddit community discussions on r/LocalLLaMA. It contains no equations, parameters, predictions, or derivations that could reduce claims to inputs by construction. The central findings emerge from coding of observed discussions rather than any self-referential fitting, self-citation chain, or ansatz. No load-bearing steps match the enumerated circularity patterns, and the study is self-contained against external data sources.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

This is an empirical qualitative study with no mathematical derivations, fitted parameters, axioms, or invented entities.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5742 in / 1003 out tokens · 18509 ms · 2026-06-26T11:24:47.838605+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages · 6 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Andrej Karpathy [@karpathy]. 2023. @AlphaSignalAI @ClementDelangue I Pretty Much Only Trust Two LLM Evals Right Now: Chatbot Arena and r/LocalLlama Comments Section. https://x.com/karpathy/status/1737544497016578453

    arXiv 2023

  2. [2]

    Andy Arditi, Oscar Obeso, Aaquib Syed, Daniel Paleka, Nina Panickssery, Wes Gurnee, and Neel Nanda. 2024. Refusal in Language Models Is Mediated by a Single Direction. arXiv:2406.11717 [cs] doi:10.48550/arXiv.2406.11717

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2406.11717 2024

  3. [3]

    Kelsey Beninger. 2017. Social media users’ views on the ethics of social media research.The SAGE handbook of social media research methods57 (2017)

    2017

  4. [4]

    Federico Bianchi, Mirac Suzgun, Giuseppe Attanasio, Paul Röttger, Dan Jurafsky, Tatsunori Hashimoto, and James Zou. 2024. Safety- Tuned LLaMAs: Lessons From Improving the Safety of Large Language Models That Follow Instructions. arXiv:2309.07875 [cs] doi:10.48550/arXiv.2309.07875

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2309.07875 2024

  5. [5]

    Sid Black, Stella Biderman, Eric Hallahan, Quentin Anthony, Leo Gao, Laurence Golding, Horace He, Connor Leahy, Kyle McDonell, Jason Phang, et al. 2022. Gpt-neox-20b: An open-source autoregressive language model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2204.06745(2022)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  6. [6]

    Sid Black, Stella Biderman, Eric Hallahan, Quentin Anthony, Leo Gao, Laurence Golding, Horace He, Connor Leahy, Kyle McDonell, Jason Phang, Michael Pieler, USVSN Sai Prashanth, Shivanshu Purohit, Laria Reynolds, Jonathan Tow, Ben Wang, and Samuel Weinbach

  7. [7]

    GPT-NeoX-20B: An Open-Source Autoregressive Language Model

    GPT-NeoX-20B: An Open-Source Autoregressive Language Model. arXiv:2204.06745 [cs] doi:10.48550/arXiv.2204.06745

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2204.06745

  8. [8]

    Tolga Bolukbasi, Kai-Wei Chang, James Y Zou, Venkatesh Saligrama, and Adam T Kalai. 2016. Man Is to Computer Programmer as Woman Is to Homemaker? Debiasing Word Embeddings. InAdvances in Neural Information Processing Systems, Vol. 29. Curran Associates, Inc

    2016

  9. [9]

    On the Opportunities and Risks of Foundation Models

    Rishi Bommasani, Drew A. Hudson, Ehsan Adeli, Russ Altman, Simran Arora, Sydney von Arx, Michael S. Bernstein, Jeannette Bohg, Antoine Bosselut, Emma Brunskill, Erik Brynjolfsson, Shyamal Buch, Dallas Card, Rodrigo Castellon, Niladri Chatterji, Annie 3https://goodsystems.utexas.edu Open AI in the Wild: Adoption and Adaptation of Open Models on r/LocalLLaM...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2108.07258 2026

  10. [10]

    Nick Bostrom. 2018. Strategic implications of openness in AI development. InArtificial intelligence safety and security. Chapman and Hall/CRC, 145–164

    2018

  11. [11]

    Stephen Casper, Carson Ezell, Charlotte Siegmann, Noam Kolt, Taylor Lynn Curtis, Ben Bucknall, Andreas A. Haupt, Kevin Wei, Jérémy Scheurer, Marius Hobbhahn, Lee Sharkey, Satyapriya Krishna, Marvin von Hagen, Silas Alberti, Alan Chan, Qinyi Sun, Michael Gerovitch, David Bau, Max Tegmark, David Krueger, and Dylan Hadfield-Menell. 2024. Black-Box Access is ...

    2024

  12. [12]

    Joel Castaño, Silverio Martínez-Fernández, Xavier Franch, and Justus Bogner. 2024. Analyzing the Evolution and Maintenance of ML Models on Hugging Face. InProceedings of the 21st International Conference on Mining Software Repositories(New York, NY, USA, 2024-07-02)(MSR ’24). Association for Computing Machinery, 607–618. doi:10.1145/3643991.3644898

    work page doi:10.1145/3643991.3644898 2024

  13. [13]

    Madiha Zahrah Choksi, Ilan Mandel, and Sebastian Benthall. 2025. The Brief and Wondrous Life of Open Models. InProceedings of the 2025 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT ’25). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 3224–3240. doi:10.1145/3715275.3732206

    work page doi:10.1145/3715275.3732206 2025

  14. [14]

    Nolazco-Flores, Lori Landay, Matthew Jackson, Paul Röttger, Philip H

    Francisco Eiras, Aleksandar Petrov, Bertie Vidgen, Christian Schroeder de Witt, Fabio Pizzati, Katherine Elkins, Supratik Mukhopadhyay, Adel Bibi, Botos Csaba, Fabro Steibel, Fazl Barez, Genevieve Smith, Gianluca Guadagni, Jon Chun, Jordi Cabot, Joseph Marvin Imperial, Juan A. Nolazco-Flores, Lori Landay, Matthew Jackson, Paul Röttger, Philip H. S. Torr, ...

  15. [15]

    arXiv:2404.17047 [cs] doi:10.48550/arXiv.2404.17047

    Near to Mid-term Risks and Opportunities of Open-Source Generative AI. arXiv:2404.17047 [cs] doi:10.48550/arXiv.2404.17047

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2404.17047

  16. [16]

    Free Software Foundation. [n. d.]. What Is Free Software? - GNU Project - Free Software Foundation. https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/ free-sw.en.html

  17. [17]

    Nathan Matias

    Devin Gaffney and J. Nathan Matias. 2018. Caveat Emptor, Computational Social Science: Large-scale Missing Data in a Widely-Published Reddit Corpus.PLOS ONE13, 7 (July 2018), e0200162. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0200162

    work page doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0200162 2018

  18. [18]

    Whiting, and K

    Dilrukshi Gamage, Piyush Ghasiya, Vamshi Bonagiri, Mark E. Whiting, and K. Sasahara. 2022. Are Deepfakes Concerning? Analyzing Conversations of Deepfakes on Reddit and Exploring Societal Implications.Proceedings of the 2022 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems(2022). https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusId:247779344

    2022

  19. [19]

    Leo Gao, Stella Biderman, Sid Black, Laurence Golding, Travis Hoppe, Charles Foster, Jason Phang, Horace He, Anish Thite, Noa Nabeshima, Shawn Presser, and Connor Leahy. 2020. The Pile: An 800GB Dataset of Diverse Text for Language Modeling. arXiv:2101.00027 [cs] doi:10.48550/arXiv.2101.00027

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2101.00027 2020

  20. [20]

    I Will Not Drink With You Today

    Robert P Gauthier, Mary Jean Costello, and James R Wallace. 2022. “I Will Not Drink With You Today”: A Topic-Guided Thematic Analysis of Addiction Recovery on Reddit. InCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems. ACM, New Orleans LA USA, 1–17. doi:10.1145/3491102.3502076

    work page doi:10.1145/3491102.3502076 2022

  21. [21]

    Dirk Groeneveld, Iz Beltagy, Pete Walsh, Akshita Bhagia, Rodney Kinney, Oyvind Tafjord, Ananya Harsh Jha, Hamish Ivison, Ian Magnusson, Yizhong Wang, et al. 2024. Olmo: Accelerating the science of language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2402.00838(2024)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  22. [22]

    Maarten Grootendorst. 2022. BERTopic: Neural topic modeling with a class-based TF-IDF procedure.arXiv preprint arXiv:2203.05794 (2022)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  23. [23]

    James Howison and Kevin Crowston. 2014. Collaboration through Open Superposition: A Theory of the Open Source Way.MIS Quarterly38, 1 (2014), 29–50. jstor:26554867 https://www.jstor.org/stable/26554867

    arXiv 2014

  24. [24]

    Jingcheng Hu, Yinmin Zhang, Qi Han, Daxin Jiang, Xiangyu Zhang, and Heung-Yeung Shum. 2025. Open-reasoner-zero: An open source approach to scaling up reinforcement learning on the base model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2503.24290(2025)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  25. [25]

    Siming Huang, Tianhao Cheng, Jason Klein Liu, Jiaran Hao, Liuyihan Song, Yang Xu, J Yang, Jiaheng Liu, Chenchen Zhang, Linzheng Chai, et al. 2024. Opencoder: The open cookbook for top-tier code large language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.04905(2024)

    arXiv 2024

  26. [26]

    Open Source Initiative. 2023. Meta’s LLaMa License Is Not Open Source. https://opensource.org/blog/metas-llama-2-license-is-not- open-source FAccT ’26, June 25–28, 2026, Montreal, Canada Lee et al

    2023

  27. [27]

    Ho, Percy Liang, and Arvind Narayanan

    Sayash Kapoor, Rishi Bommasani, Kevin Klyman, Shayne Longpre, Ashwin Ramaswami, Peter Cihon, Aspen Hopkins, Kevin Bankston, Stella Biderman, Miranda Bogen, Rumman Chowdhury, Alex Engler, Peter Henderson, Yacine Jernite, Seth Lazar, Stefano Maffulli, Alondra Nelson, Joelle Pineau, Aviya Skowron, Dawn Song, Victor Storchan, Daniel Zhang, Daniel E. Ho, Percy...

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.07918 2024

  28. [28]

    Andreas Köpf, Yannic Kilcher, Dimitri von Rütte, Sotiris Anagnostidis, Zhi-Rui Tam, Keith Stevens, Abdullah Barhoum, Nguyen Minh Duc, Oliver Stanley, Richárd Nagyfi, Shahul ES, Sameer Suri, David Glushkov, Arnav Dantuluri, Andrew Maguire, Christoph Schuh- mann, Huu Nguyen, and Alexander Mattick. 2023. OpenAssistant Conversations – Democratizing Large Lang...

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2304.07327 2023

  29. [29]

    Woosuk Kwon, Zhuohan Li, Siyuan Zhuang, Ying Sheng, Lianmin Zheng, Cody Hao Yu, Joseph Gonzalez, Hao Zhang, and Ion Stoica. 2023. Efficient Memory Management for Large Language Model Serving with PagedAttention. InProceedings of the 29th Symposium on Operating Systems Principles(New York, NY, USA, 2023-10-23)(SOSP ’23). Association for Computing Machinery...

    work page doi:10.1145/3600006.3613165 2023

  30. [30]

    Nathan Lambert. [n. d.]. Stanford CS25: V4 I Aligning Open Language Models - YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/

  31. [31]

    Max Langenkamp and Daniel N. Yue. 2022. How Open Source Machine Learning Software Shapes AI. InProceedings of the 2022 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society. ACM, Oxford United Kingdom, 385–395. doi:10.1145/3514094.3534167

    work page doi:10.1145/3514094.3534167 2022

  32. [32]

    Andreas Liesenfeld and Mark Dingemanse. 2024. Rethinking Open Source Generative AI: Open Washing and the EU AI Act. InThe 2024 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency. ACM, Rio de Janeiro Brazil, 1774–1787. doi:10.1145/3630106.3659005

    work page doi:10.1145/3630106.3659005 2024

  33. [33]

    Andreas Liesenfeld, Alianda Lopez, and Mark Dingemanse. 2023. Opening up ChatGPT: Tracking Openness, Transparency, and Accountability in Instruction-Tuned Text Generators. InProceedings of the 5th International Conference on Conversational User Interfaces (Eindhoven Netherlands, 2023-07-19). ACM, 1–6. doi:10.1145/3571884.3604316

    work page doi:10.1145/3571884.3604316 2023

  34. [34]

    A Cartography of Open Collaboration in Open Source AI: Mapping Practices, Motivations, and Governance in 14 Open Large Language Model Projects

    Johan Linåker, Cailean Osborne, Jennifer Ding, and Ben Burtenshaw. 2025.A Cartography of Open Collaboration in Open Source AI: Mapping Practices, Motivations, and Governance in 14 Open Large Language Model Projects. arXiv:2509.25397 [cs] doi:10.48550/arXiv.2509. 25397

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2509 2025

  35. [35]

    2025.Economies of Open Intelligence: Tracing Power & Participation in the Model Ecosystem

    Shayne Longpre, Christopher Akiki, Campbell Lund, Atharva Kulkarni, Emily Chen, Irene Solaiman, Avijit Ghosh, Yacine Jernite, and Lucie-Aimée Kaffee. 2025.Economies of Open Intelligence: Tracing Power & Participation in the Model Ecosystem. arXiv:2512.03073 [cs] doi:10.48550/arXiv.2512.03073

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2512.03073 2025

  36. [36]

    2025.Meta’s LLaMa License Is Still Not Open Source

    Jordan Maris. 2025.Meta’s LLaMa License Is Still Not Open Source. Open Source Initiative. https://opensource.org/blog/metas-llama- license-is-still-not-open-source/

    2025

  37. [37]

    Leland McInnes, John Healy, Steve Astels, et al. 2017. hdbscan: Hierarchical density based clustering.J. Open Source Softw.2, 11 (2017), 205

    2017

  38. [38]

    Leland McInnes, John Healy, and James Melville. 2018. Umap: Uniform manifold approximation and projection for dimension reduction. arXiv preprint arXiv:1802.03426(2018)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  39. [39]

    Team OLMo, Pete Walsh, Luca Soldaini, Dirk Groeneveld, Kyle Lo, Shane Arora, Akshita Bhagia, Yuling Gu, Shengyi Huang, Matt Jordan, et al. 2024. 2 OLMo 2 Furious.arXiv preprint arXiv:2501.00656(2024)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  40. [40]

    Cailean Osborne, Jennifer Ding, and Hannah Rose Kirk. 2024. The AI Community Building the Future? A Quantitative Analysis of Development Activity on Hugging Face Hub.Journal of Computational Social Science7, 2 (Oct. 2024), 2067–2105. doi:10.1007/s42001- 024-00300-8

    work page doi:10.1007/s42001- 2024

  41. [41]

    Tamara Paris, AJung Moon, and Jin L.C. Guo. 2025. Opening the Scope of Openness in AI. InProceedings of the 2025 ACM Conference on Fairness, Accountability, and Transparency (FAccT ’25). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 1293–1311. doi:10.1145/3715275.3732087

    work page doi:10.1145/3715275.3732087 2025

  42. [42]

    Nicholas Proferes, Naiyan Jones, Sarah Gilbert, Casey Fiesler, and Michael Zimmer. 2021. Studying Reddit: A Systematic Overview of Disciplines, Approaches, Methods, and Ethics.Social Media + Society7, 2 (April 2021), 20563051211019004. doi:10.1177/20563051211019004

    work page doi:10.1177/20563051211019004 2021

  43. [43]

    Weihong Qi, Jinsheng Pan, Hanjia Lyu, and Jiebo Luo. 2023. Excitements and Concerns in the Post-ChatGPT Era: Deciphering Public Perception of AI through Social Media Analysis.Telematics Informatics92 (2023), 102158. https://api.semanticscholar.org/CorpusId: 259837235

    2023

  44. [44]

    Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model is Secretly a Reward Model

    Rafael Rafailov, Archit Sharma, Eric Mitchell, Stefano Ermon, Christopher D. Manning, and Chelsea Finn. 2024. Direct Preference Optimization: Your Language Model Is Secretly a Reward Model. arXiv:2305.18290 [cs] doi:10.48550/arXiv.2305.18290

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.2305.18290 2024

  45. [45]

    Reddit. 2021. Advertising—Audience—Reddit. Discover what makes Reddit ads unique. Red- dit.com. (2021, January 17). Advertising—Audience—Reddit. Discover what makes Reddit ads unique. https://web.archive.org/web/20210117184818/https://www.redditinc.com/advertising/audience

    arXiv 2021

  46. [46]

    Nils Reimers and Iryna Gurevych. 2019. Sentence-bert: Sentence embeddings using siamese bert-networks. InProceedings of the 2019 conference on empirical methods in natural language processing and the 9th international joint conference on natural language processing (EMNLP-IJCNLP). 3982–3992

    2019

  47. [47]

    Elizabeth Seger, Noemi Dreksler, Richard Moulange, Emily Dardaman, Jonas Schuett, K. Wei, Christoph Winter, Mackenzie Arnold, Seán Ó hEigeartaigh, Anton Korinek, Markus Anderljung, Ben Bucknall, Alan Chan, Eoghan Stafford, Leonie Koessler, Aviv Ovadya, Ben Open AI in the Wild: Adoption and Adaptation of Open Models on r/LocalLLaMA FAccT ’26, June 25–28, 2...

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2311.09227 2026

  48. [48]

    Elizabeth Seger, Aviv Ovadya, Divya Siddarth, Ben Garfinkel, and Allan Dafoe. 2023. Democratising AI: Multiple Meanings, Goals, and Methods. InProceedings of the 2023 AAAI/ACM Conference on AI, Ethics, and Society (AIES ’23). Association for Computing Machinery, New York, NY, USA, 715–722. doi:10.1145/3600211.3604693

    work page doi:10.1145/3600211.3604693 2023

  49. [49]

    2023.The Mirage of Open-Source AI: Analyzing Meta’s Llama 2 Release Strategy

    Alex Tarkowski. 2023.The Mirage of Open-Source AI: Analyzing Meta’s Llama 2 Release Strategy. Open Future. https://openfuture.eu/ blog/the-mirage-of-open-source-ai-analyzing-metas-llama-2-release-strategy

    2023

  50. [50]

    Hugo Touvron, Thibaut Lavril, Gautier Izacard, Xavier Martinet, Marie-Anne Lachaux, Timothée Lacroix, Baptiste Rozière, Naman Goyal, Eric Hambro, Faisal Azhar, et al. 2023. Llama: Open and efficient foundation language models.arXiv preprint arXiv:2302.13971 (2023)

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  51. [51]

    User Innovation Networks

    Eric Von Hippel. 2005. Open Source Software Projects as "User Innovation Networks". InPerspectives on Free and Open Source Software, Joseph Feller, Brian Fitzgerald, Scott A. Hissam, and Karim R. Lakhani (Eds.). The MIT Press, 267–278. doi:10.7551/mitpress/5326.003.0021

    work page doi:10.7551/mitpress/5326.003.0021 2005

  52. [52]

    Matt White, Ibrahim Haddad, Cailean Osborne, Xiao-Yang Yanglet Liu, Ahmed Abdelmonsef, Sachin Varghese, and Arnaud Le Hors

  53. [53]

    arXiv preprint arXiv:2403.13784 (2024) https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2403.13784

    The Model Openness Framework: Promoting Completeness and Openness for Reproducibility, Transparency, and Usability in Artificial Intelligence. arXiv:2403.13784 [cs] doi:10.48550/arXiv.2403.13784

    work page doi:10.48550/arxiv.2403.13784

  54. [54]

    David Gray Widder, Sarah West, and Meredith Whittaker. 2023. Open (For Business): Big Tech, Concentrated Power, and the Political Economy of Open AI. social science research network:4543807 doi:10.2139/ssrn.4543807

    work page doi:10.2139/ssrn.4543807 2023

  55. [55]

    serious use

    BigScience Workshop, Teven Le Scao, Angela Fan, Christopher Akiki, Ellie Pavlick, Suzana Ilić, Daniel Hesslow, Roman Castagné, Alexandra Sasha Luccioni, François Yvon, et al. 2022. Bloom: A 176b-parameter open-access multilingual language model.arXiv preprint arXiv:2211.05100(2022). FAccT ’26, June 25–28, 2026, Montreal, Canada Lee et al. A Posts with res...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022