Anthropic released Claude to the public this month, and it’s worth paying attention to—not just as another LLM, but for what it represents. Constitutional AI, the approach behind Claude, offers a different philosophy for making AI systems helpful, harmless, and honest.
Here’s what makes Claude and Constitutional AI interesting.
What Is Constitutional AI
The Approach
constitutional_ai:
core_idea:
- Define a "constitution" of principles
- Train AI to follow these principles
- Self-critique and revision during training
principles_examples:
- Be helpful, harmless, and honest
- Avoid encouraging illegal activities
- Be respectful and considerate
- Acknowledge uncertainty
training_process:
1: Generate responses to prompts
2: Self-critique against constitution
3: Revise responses based on critique
4: Use revised data for training
Why It Matters
significance:
transparency:
- Principles are explicit, not hidden
- Users can understand the constraints
- Researchers can evaluate alignment
scalability:
- Self-critique reduces human labeling
- Principles can be updated
- Easier to debug behavior
flexibility:
- Different constitutions for different uses
- Customizable for enterprise
- Evolve with societal values
Claude vs. GPT-4
Different Philosophies
approach_comparison:
openai_gpt4:
safety_approach: RLHF with human feedback
transparency: Limited visibility into constraints
focus: Capability + safety guardrails
anthropic_claude:
safety_approach: Constitutional AI
transparency: Principles more visible
focus: Safety-first design
Practical Differences
usage_differences:
claude_strengths:
- Longer context window (100K tokens)
- More nuanced refusals
- Better at explaining its reasoning
- Consistent personality
claude_considerations:
- Sometimes more conservative
- Different API structure
- Smaller ecosystem currently
evaluation:
- Try both for your use case
- Different models excel at different tasks
- Safety profiles may differ
Using Claude Effectively
API Basics
import anthropic
client = anthropic.Anthropic()
response = client.messages.create(
model="claude-2",
max_tokens=1024,
messages=[
{"role": "user", "content": "Explain constitutional AI simply."}
]
)
print(response.content[0].text)
System Prompts
# Claude respects system prompts for context
response = client.messages.create(
model="claude-2",
max_tokens=1024,
system="You are a technical writer helping document APIs.",
messages=[
{"role": "user", "content": "Document this endpoint: GET /users/{id}"}
]
)
Implications for Development
Multi-Model Strategy
multi_model_approach:
why:
- Different models for different tasks
- Reduce single-provider dependency
- Optimize cost and quality
considerations:
- API differences require abstraction
- Safety profiles vary
- Feature availability differs
recommendation:
- Abstract LLM calls
- Test across providers
- Choose per use case
Key Takeaways
- Constitutional AI makes safety principles explicit and trainable
- Claude offers an alternative with different safety philosophy
- Long context window (100K tokens) enables new use cases
- Multi-model strategies reduce risk and optimize outcomes
- Different models for different tasks is becoming normal
- Safety approaches will continue evolving
- Having multiple capable LLMs is good for the ecosystem
Competition and different approaches make AI development healthier.