2 ms·
This is more or less the concept of time, correct? I think an AI can understand state in simple cases (i.e. it can likely answer correctly "I didn't water my pl
by fullstackchris 4y ago
This is more or less the concept of time, correct? I think an AI can understand state in simple cases (i.e. it can likely answer correctly "I didn't water my plant in 2 months, is it dead?"), but the way the current models are designed its just request / response, they perhaps from the very root way of how they are implemented don't (or can't) have a sort of _narrative_ sense of state. This is also present when you have a conversation with them. They won't bring up topics from the start or earlier part of the conversation, because they don't really "know" they happened. They simply receive and reply, that doesn't actually change the state of the model itself. To me this is one of the main keys that still need to be unlocked in AI capabilities. You need a neural net to modify itself in real time and track those changes to be able to have this sense.
To provide an example, it's almost like you need a _time series_ of GPT-3s, not just a single GPT-3 neural network, and the model itself would need to be able to self-inspect those time series and say to itself "ah yes, this was my old foolish understanding, now I have this new, better, understanding". I have no idea how this would look in technical terms, these are just the musings of a somewhat more-than-casual AI observer.
- Agentlien 4y agoIt's not really consistent outside of temporal issues. As mentioned there are buttons for redoing or changing the AI response. This is because it often spouts nonsense or loses the plot. In my example above the god who should have been dead talked about himself as a third person. The AI also often mixes up people's gender or roles. One issue that used to be very common but has improved lately is that it used to mix up who said what in dialogues.