>a grammatically infinite possible sentence
This is a poor understanding of set theory and an even worse one of LLMs. Notice this output here:
>Accountability. Integrity. Synergy.
is not really grammatical either. The "grammar" is the logic internal to the reference relations of the given signs, but the "inner" of the text is always given by the supplement (the next token prediction) which is demanded by such a total coherency, but which also erases and puts it into question since such a supplement itself demands its own. What is given is the always incomplete text itself, which is always open to its own re-signification, and thus its own possibility of a new grammar, of every possible prompt.
>and an even worse one of LLMs
yeah, I was being facetious, which seemed to me very in keeping with the subject and main post. I don't expect an LLM to output a grammatically correct sentence or require grammatically correct input.