Visuals v/s Description. Splitting a task into different models works better than expected.

Reddit r/ArtificialInteligence News

Summary

A user shares how splitting a visual coding task between Gemini (to produce XML description from an image) and Claude (to generate Next.js/Tailwind code) improved accuracy and reduced token cost compared to using Claude alone.

So about a hour ago, I was coding with Claude projects. I was building my site, and thought of generating the prototype from Image 2, then using Claude. I asked it to provide me the component in Next JS, & Tailwind according to the shown image. And it generates gibberish. The visuals perfectly addresses all the visuals, but Claude couldn't code it, and generated something ..*shameful*. So, even though Claude excels at Coding & creative writing, it's all nuts when it comes to analyzing an Image. Well then after a short research, I used XML to properly define the visual through Gemini. And then pasted the XML + Visuals into Claude. And it created as exactly shown (but with black background and some tweaks). What it costed me before was: 250K tokens = Fluff. Then after this, it costed: 140K tokens. The cost was lower, but the results were actually different. What's your opinion about this? Ps, BTW, I'm thinking of creating a documentry to discuss about building a powerful SaaS, with LLMS. I will discuss about my failures and realization. Just saying ^⁠_⁠_⁠_⁠_⁠_⁠_⁠_⁠_⁠_⁠^ . Downvote me, if I don't fit this subreddit, & comment.
Original Article

Similar Articles

No wonder Qwen and Gemma are so different

Reddit r/LocalLLaMA

A user shares an observation that Qwen and Gemma tokenize code very differently, with Qwen using far fewer tokens for the same HTML/JS input, which may explain differences in coding and language performance. They also note a potential retraining project by LiquidAI using a more efficient tokenizer.