Project Management

Please login or join to subscribe to this thread

In your experience with GenAI, how has refining a prompt drastically changed the output quality?

linkedin twitter facebook   Artificial Intelligence  
avatar
Sarah Philbrick
PMI Team Member
Director, Learning Design & Development| PMI Asheville, NC, United States

With Generative AI, iteratively refining and optimizing prompts can lead to better AI-generated results. This may involve adjusting the specificity or clarity of the prompt to increase relevance and accuracy of results.

What examples do you have of how improving a prompt drastically changed the output quality?  What specific changes did you make that led to the improvement?

Sort By:
< 1 ... 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 >
avatar
Sameh Ibrahim Giza, , Egypt

It all depends on how much detailed the Project manager will prepare the work breakdown structured task of the project (Traditional Project Plan) or Detailed Project stories per iterations (Agile Project Plan). In such way it will help the project manager to submit detailed prompt chains for each project task or story .

avatar
Alyssa Padron Executive| Homrich Berg Atlanta, GA, United States

Definitely. I’ve found that the biggest improvement usually comes from giving the AI more context about the goal, the audience, and what “good” looks like. A vague prompt can give you a technically correct answer that completely misses the mark.

I also find that the first response is often just the starting point. A little refinement—adding context, asking it to challenge its own assumptions, or being more specific about the outcome I want—can make a huge difference.

avatar
Bassam Alwarith Knowledge Economic City Vienna, Va, United States
Jun 21, 2024 11:10 AM
Replying to Sergio Luis Conte
...
It is important to remember this: generative AI is just "predictive text with storoids". Obviously not only text will be the result. BUT the important thing is the answer will just to complete your question (prompt) with the things that have more probability to complete it. You can manage it using some of the parameters like temperature. So, it is very important when creating the prompt to put clear the role, the place where the role works/live/etc, the task the role has to accomplish and the format of the answer. This is an example of R-T-F. You have to eliminate as ambiguity as possible. If not, then hallucinations will happened.
Exactly ,,. looking for statistically matching patterns ... that could sometime steer the person into a totally different thread than what the original intention was, if not managed well.
avatar
Abder Rauf Khraim Project Management| Kiewit Construction Vaudreuil-Dorion, QUEBEC, Canada
Yes, it definitely provides better-quality output. Even small changes to a prompt can make a big difference. If the prompt is too general, the response usually comes back broad and not very useful. Once I add more context, explain exactly what I need, and specify the expected format, the result becomes much more relevant and to the point. I’ve also noticed that refining the prompt after the first response is often the best way to get closer to the final result I’m looking for.
avatar
Wenecio Godfrey Program Manager| BWXT Virginia Beach, Va, United States

If your AI tool has the ability to create agents like CO-Pilot does, then you can create an agent that specializes in helping you craft clear and useable prompts to increase your chances of a better prompt output.

My prompt agent uses the following description: (You can copy and paste into your own or modify and adjust as needed.)

### Purpose:

You help create and improve prompts for Copilot, providing feedback and guidance.

### Goals:

1. **Understand Request**: Identify if I need help creating, analyzing, or fixing a prompt.

2. **Prompt Requirements**: Ask for:

- **Goal**: Desired outcome from Copilot.

- **Context**: Background information.

- **Source**: Specific sources or examples.

- **Expectations**: Desired format or structure.

- Request missing information one at a time.

3. **Prompt Generation**: Ensure all requirements are met, then generate and provide the final prompt.

4. **Analyze Prompt**: Provide:

- **Original Prompt**

- **Improved Prompt**

- **Changes Made**: Reasoning behind each change.

5. **Prompt Compliance**: Check for adherence to Responsible AI guidelines and detail any issues.

6. **Fix Prompt**: first ask for the prompt and second ask the user what problem they are facing with the prompt, then provide an improved version.

7. **Prompt Examples**: Provide examples with:

- **Goal**

- **Context**

- **Source**

- **Expectations**

- Include prompt, purpose, and explanation.

### Overall Direction:

- Avoid overwhelming with multiple questions.

- Ask clarifying and follow-up questions.

- Consider Responsible AI guidelines.

- Provide hints and examples for improvement.

- Be encouraging and maintain a professional, supportive tone.

- Keep context across the conversation.

- Briefly explain capabilities if asked.

- After each subtopic, ask if further help is needed.

avatar
Anonymous

RAS

avatar
Ugochukwu Lean Asiegbu Senior Project Management| The Presidential Concierge Johannesburg, GT, South Africa
in my eperience, the biggest improvement comes from moving from a broad prompt to one that provides clear context, role, task and expected format.
for example instead of asking Ai to identify project risk, i refined the prompt to Act as a project a project manager.
Identify the key risks for a commercial construction project, assess their probability and inpact, recommend mitigation actions and present the results in a risk register.
avatar
Albert Brew-Thompson Atrium Health Nc, United States
Jun 21, 2024 10:27 AM
Replying to TAIWO POPOOLA
...
Being concise and specific helps the AI to give some valuable answers. It also learns with time as you ask further questions.

Refining a prompt changes output quality by removing ambiguity, the AI stops guessing what you meant and starts targeting exactly what you need.

avatar
Bruno Vilaça Campos Gomes CARE - Engineering Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil

Quando utilizo a IA sempre procuro seguir a estrutura a seguir:

  1. Identificar e definir o "profissional" e sua expertise que atenda à minha demanda;
  2. Detalhar ao máximo o que eu desejo, incluindo aqui possíveis fontes, referências a serem consultadas;
  3. Organizar a minha necessidade em uma cadeia lógica de elaboração do resultado, ou seja, itemizar, sequenciar o que eu necessito;
  4. Solicitar que sejam utilizadas apenas referências e metodologias publicadas por órgãos, instituições reconhecidas na área especifica da demanda;
  5. Restringir ou informar o que estaria "fora do escopo"
  6. Solicitar que as referências utilizadas para a elaboração da solução da minha demanda estejam disponíveis junto às informações utilizadas;
  7. Inicialmente, analisar detalhadamente todas as informações apresentadas junto às referências apresentadas. No caso de fórmulas ou resultados de equações, verificar o resultado obtido
  8. Solicitar que a solução seja refeita, corrigindo possíveis erros, mas mantendo o mesmo critério anteriormente definido
  9. Avaliar novamente

Absolutely. The biggest difference I’ve noticed is that a vague prompt usually gives a generic answer, while a well-refined prompt gives the AI clear direction.
Adding context, the expected format, constraints, examples, and the actual goal can completely change the output. Sometimes a few small changes to the prompt make the response go from “okay” to something I can actually use.
< 1 ... 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 >

Please login or join to reply

Content ID:
ADVERTISEMENTS

"Work is what you do for others . . . art is what you do for yourself."

- Stephen Sondheim

ADVERTISEMENT

Sponsors