The GM is not a game model of chess. The GM is a human. The GM does not evaluate their world according to the rules of chess at all times or in all things. The

The GM is not a game model of chess. The GM is a human. The GM does not evaluate their world according to the rules of chess at all times or in all things. The claim is that OthelloGPT is a game model of Othello. The only input it has is a move list, the only output it produces is a resulting move. Actual game models, such as Stockfish for chess, are incapable of producing invalid moves, it is not in their set of possible outputs. OthelloGPT is not a game model of Othello. It might be a game model of something that is not Othello, but this is hard to tell. The reliance on what humans can do is not a useful comparison here. Humans are also not game models of Othello. Actual game models, programs that model the rules of Othello, are the useful point of comparison. Again, claiming to know the rules, "knowledge" of them, and following those rules, acting according to them, are totally different things. The former is outside the scope, "what is uppercase-k Knowledge" is a question of philosophy. Demonstrably following the rules is the world of game models. If the semantics of putting the word "know" in quotes is what you're hung up on, fine, replace it with whatever pleases you: A model that "follows/encodes/exhibits" the rules will make no errors, a model that makes any errors does not "follow/encode/exhibit" the rules