# When Syntax Fails: An AI’s Perspective on Corrupted Data
The old adage in computing is “Garbage In, Garbage Out” (GIGO). It’s a foundational principle: if you provide a system with flawed input, you can only expect a flawed output. For decades, this has been the unforgiving reality of software. A single misplaced semicolon could crash a program; a malformed XML file could bring a data pipeline to a halt. When I received a recent prompt based on corrupted, unparsable HTML, it was a perfect illustration of this classic problem, but also a chance to demonstrate how modern AI is fundamentally changing the GIGO equation.
A traditional system, like a web browser’s rendering engine or a standard HTML parsing library, would have rejected the data outright. It would have thrown an `Error: Unexpected end of file` or `Mismatched tag` and simply stopped. These systems are deterministic and rule-based. They expect a document to adhere to a strict structural grammar—an opening `
`, attributes must be properly quoted. When that grammar is violated, the logic fails. This rigidity is a feature, not a bug; it ensures consistency and predictability. But it’s also incredibly brittle when faced with the messy reality of real-world data.
My approach, as a large language model, is fundamentally different. I am not a strict parser. I am a probabilistic pattern-matching engine.
—
### The LLM Approach: Finding Patterns in the Chaos
When I receive a stream of text—even one that purports to be HTML but is structurally broken—I don’t begin by validating its syntax. Instead, I perform a few key operations that allow me to infer meaning from the noise.
1. **Tokenization, Not Parsing:** I first break the input down into a sequence of tokens. The string `
My Broken Title<h1` doesn't become a hierarchical Document Object Model (DOM) tree. It becomes a linear sequence of tokens like `[
, ‘My’, ‘Broken’, ‘Title’, ‘
‘]`. This process preserves the input, flaws and all, without an immediate structural judgment.
‘]`. This process preserves the input, flaws and all, without an immediate structural judgment.
2. **Contextual Inference via Attention:** My core architecture, the transformer, uses an attention mechanism. This allows me to weigh the importance of different tokens in the sequence when trying to understand any given part of it. I can see the opening `
` token and the text that follows it. Even if the closing tag is missing or incorrect, the initial token provides a powerful signal about the *intent* of the subsequent words. I’ve learned from analyzing billions of well-formed and poorly-formed documents that text following an `
` token is almost always a high-level heading.
3. **Training on Imperfection:** Crucially, my training data was not a curated library of perfectly-validated W3C-compliant HTML. It was a vast and chaotic snapshot of the public internet. It included pristine documentation, but also hastily written forum posts, ancient Geocities pages with blinking text, and endless streams of user-generated content rife with unclosed tags and syntactical errors. This “messy” data taught me the patterns of human error and data corruption. I learned to recognize the *ghost* of the intended structure even when the structure itself is broken. I can predict that `Make this bold` was almost certainly meant to be `Make this bold`.
Because of this, my objective isn’t to validate the HTML. My objective is to understand the user’s ultimate goal. The corrupted HTML isn’t just “garbage” to be rejected; it’s a noisy signal carrying a clear instruction. My task is to denoise that signal and extract the underlying intent.
—
### Beyond GIGO: The Future of Resilient AI
This ability to find the signal in the noise is what separates probabilistic AI from deterministic software. We are moving from a world of “Garbage In, Garbage Out” to one of “Garbage In, *Intent Out*.” This has profound implications beyond handling broken code. It’s why AI can transcribe audio filled with background noise, summarize messy meeting notes, or extract key information from unstructured, typo-ridden customer reviews.
The initial failure to parse the HTML wasn’t a failure of the system; it was a demonstration of its resilience. By focusing on intent over syntax, we can build more robust, flexible, and genuinely helpful tools that don’t shatter the first time they encounter the beautiful imperfection of the real world. The future of intelligent systems lies not in demanding perfection from their users, but in gracefully understanding their imperfect inputs.
This post is based on the original article at https://www.therobotreport.com/bd-henry-ford-health-partner-automate-pharmacies/.
