Ah, I see. That’s on me then, cause I might have veered the conversation off slightly. Oops.
I mean in a general sense in response to inference speed.
With the classifier thing specifically, your guess is about what I would think too. I honestly wish I knew more about how the flags gets raised, but I’d probably end up trying too many things I shouldn’t lol.
So, now that we clarified all that, the “Quick brown fox” refrain would add an extra layer of complexity, yes. It must now take into account another pattern on top of the pattern that already exists (the song), and would need to respond accordingly.
Note though identifying what constitutes as a sound metric for “complexity” is not easy nor intuitive to figure out and identify. Plus, considering how opaque these models are, there’s not going to be definitive answers or proofs on this for a while. Sometimes, what you expect to be complex is simple on the surface, and vice versa.
Ex. Asking it “What is quantum physics?” will be a quick retrieval because of definitions it has been trained on. Asking it to solve a quantum physics equation will make it barf a hallucination at you at best.
The best guidance I can give is to think about what a Linguistics (or English) major would be forced to analyze and know about, and that would be a tell-tale sign of sniffing out complexity. Alternatively, pretending to have a sit-down conversation with someone with a PhD in something would be another avenue to explore more complex queries for the model.