Why "Blah Blah Blah" Makes Your AI Seem Smarter: The Hidden Role of GPU Batching Nondeterminism
Discover how prompt length affects LLM output consistency through GPU batching mechanisms, and how adding meaningless text can actually improve AI reliability.

Visualization of how GPU inference servers bucket prompts by length, affecting output consistency
TL;DR
Adding meaningless text like “blah blah blah” before your question can make AI responses more consistent. This is a side effect of how AI infrastructure handles input.
The core issue: GPU batching and floating-point arithmetic create unpredictable variations in AI outputs, even at temperature 0.
The Mysterious Case of Inconsistent AI Responses
Ask an AI the same question twice and get different answers. It’s frustrating, especially when you’ve set temperature to 0 expecting deterministic responses.
This isn’t a bug in the model. It’s the side effect of modern AI infrastructure.
When Determinism Breaks Down
At temperature 0, you’d expect identical outputs for identical prompts. But researchers asked “Tell me about Richard Feynman” 1,000 times and produced 80 different responses. Most said he was born in “Queens, New York,” but 8 claimed “New York City” instead.
The divergence happened after just 102 tokens, showing how quickly small computational differences compound into completely different outputs.
The Math Problem: Floating-Point Arithmetic Isn’t Perfect
Here’s the crucial part: in floating-point math, order matters.
In regular math: (a + b) + c = a + (b + c)
In floating-point math:
(0.1 + 1e20) - 1e20 = 0
0.1 + (1e20 - 1e20) = 0.1
This happens because GPUs add thousands of numbers in parallel, and the order they’re added changes the final result.
How GPUs Process Your Prompts
To serve thousands of users efficiently, AI servers use batching:
- Tokenization: Text → numbers
- Bucketing: Group by length (short, medium, long)
- Padding: Make all sequences in the bucket the same length
- Processing: Run through transformer layers
┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ Inference Server │
├─────────────┬─────────────┬─────────────────┬───────────────────┤
│ Short Bucket│ Medium Bucket│ Long Bucket │ Extra-Long Bucket│
│ (0–20 tokens)│ (20–100) │ (100–500) │ (500+) │
├─────────────┼─────────────┼─────────────────┼───────────────────┤
│ "Hi" │ "Write a" │ "The history" │ "blah blah..." │
│ "Who is" │ "Translate" │ "Summarize the" │ │
│ "2+2=?" │ "Explain" │ "Compare AI" │ │
└─────────────┴─────────────┴─────────────────┴───────────────────┘
Batch-Invariant Failures
Here’s some technical jargon: GPU kernels aren’t batch-invariant.
The same mathematical operation can produce different results depending on batch size because:
- Different batch sizes trigger different GPU strategies
- Small batches use different optimization paths
- Varying chunking strategies change reduction orders
As server load fluctuates, your identical prompt might be processed with 5, 15, or 127 other requests, each using slightly different computational paths.
Why “Blah Blah Blah” Might Help (And Might Not)
The theory is straightforward: adding text changes your prompt’s bucket, potentially avoiding unstable batch sizes.
Before (Problem):
┌─────────────┐
│ Short Bucket│
│ "2+2=?" │ ← Processed with 15 random queries
│ "Hi" │
│ "Weather?" │
└─────────────┘
After (Potential Fix):
┌─────────────────┐
│ Long Bucket │
│ "blah blah..." │ ← Processed with fewer queries
│ "The history..."│
└─────────────────┘
But Here’s The Catch
This approach is unreliable because:
- You don’t know where optimization thresholds are
- These thresholds vary by provider and model
- You might accidentally move to a more unstable regime
- What works for one provider fails for another
Bottom line: It’s an unproven workaround, not a reliable technique.
The Real Solution: Batch-Invariant Kernels
Engineers can solve this with batch-invariant kernels—specifically engineered to use fixed reduction orders regardless of batch size.
Researchers have demonstrated this works: 1,000 identical prompts = 1,000 identical responses.
But there’s a catch: 60% performance penalty. Most providers choose speed over reproducibility because most users don’t notice the inconsistency.
What This Means For You
For Users
- Don’t expect perfect reproducibility at temperature 0
- Longer prompts might be more stable, but it’s not guaranteed
- Multiple sampling and choosing the best response is still valid
- Be skeptical of “prompt hacks” claiming guaranteed improvements
For Developers
- Batch-invariant inference is possible but requires careful engineering
- The determinism vs. performance tradeoff is real
- Users deserve transparency about these limitations
- True reinforcement learning requires deterministic inference
For The AI Field
- Infrastructure choices directly impact user experience
- “Floating-point noise” isn’t just noise—it’s real user-facing problems
- The line between model behavior and infrastructure is blurry
The Deeper Truth: Prompts Are Computational Metadata
The “blah blah blah” phenomenon reveals something profound: prompt engineering isn’t purely linguistic.
Every word you write influences:
- Which bucketing strategy captures your request
- Which GPU optimization paths get triggered
- What computational order processes your input
Your prompts aren’t just semantic input—they’re computational metadata that affects how your request flows through the entire AI stack.
Conclusion: AI Intelligence Is Infrastructure-Dependent
The perceived intelligence of an AI system emerges from the complex interaction between:
- Model weights and training
- Hardware architecture
- Current server load
- Batching strategies
- Floating-point precision
- Kernel optimization choices
Understanding this helps explain seemingly erratic AI behavior—and shows how deeply human experience is shaped by the machines that mediate it, down to the level of how numbers are added together on a GPU.
The next time you add “blah blah blah” to a prompt, remember: you’re not just changing words—you’re changing computational paths.
Further Reading
- Defeating Nondeterminism in LLM Inference - Technical deep-dive on batch-invariance
- Experiments in Prompt Engineering - Original user observations