3 ms·
Just because something doesn’t display understanding by responding to your expectation doesn’t mean it doesn’t possess understanding . If you ran into my offic
by evrydayhustling 6y ago
Just because something doesn’t display understanding by responding to your expectation doesn’t mean it doesn’t possess understanding . If you ran into my office with these prompts, the response to each would be “what the hell are you doing in my office?” All behavior is contextualized, and GPT-3’s native context is predicting continuous text, not answering questions.
It’s a distracting anthropomorphism to even attempt ascribing “understanding” to a model like GPT-3. An assessment of its useful capabilities should be through an honest effort to get it to do something - and should of course include consideration of the effort/intelligence required to do so. Marcus knows enough to know this set up is inappropriate, so the article reads as disingenuous.
- dllthomas 6y agoRight. If I went to a human speaker, who presumably possesses "actual understanding", and I said "I have some prompts for you. Please try to continue where they left off" and then provide them a question, it wouldn't be strange that they don't answer it. Do we ever answer a question right after we've asked it? Sure. Do we always? I wonder if you can force "an attempt" at answering a question (to flagrantly anthropomorphize) by following the question with something like "The answer is ..."
- evrydayhustling 6y agoYeah, the suffix you suggest is an example of what you’ll see folks calling “prompt design”. It’s becoming an important theme in NLP literature, partly as a forensics tool to find out what kinds of knowledge models encode, and partly as a path to getting a single expensive training regime to assist a variety of tasks.
- killerstorm 6y agoYes, if you want answers, you need to frame it as a Q&A session: https://lacker.io/ai/2020/07/06/giving-gpt-3-a-turing-test.html https://lacker.io/ai/2020/07/06/giving-gpt-3-a-turing-test.h...