3 ms·
>However, by approaching arithmetic as an algorithm to be performed and taught similarly to how it's done with people, you can supercharge accuracy to basically
by flangola7 4y ago
>However, by approaching arithmetic as an algorithm to be performed and taught similarly to how it's done with people, you can supercharge accuracy to basically 100% for up to 13 digit addition and >90% after.
This is strikingly clear evidence that it is capable of logical reasoning and "knows things", and puts to rest repeated claims that it is just memorization and collaging. You can't memorize every combo of two 13 digit numbers within the file size of the model.
- sebzim4500 4y ago> repeated claims that it is just memorization and collaging I don't think anyone who has actually used GPT-4 for more than a few minutes ever believed this. It was just a trendy thing to say for a while.
- guenthert 4y agoIt's rather said by people who have a rough understanding of how ML is implemented, rather then those who are mesmerized by its output.
- sebzim4500 4y agoYeah, I think it's one of those cases where a little knowledge is a dangerous thing.
- int_19h 4y agoYou can find people making such claims on HN, and some of them also claim that it is based on their personal experience with GPT-4. It boggles my mind, as well.
- hnfong 4y agoSuperiority of human intelligence must not be questioned.
- int_19h 4y agoIt's not even that. GPT-4 is clearly not superior either way. I think it's more about the uniqueness of human intelligence. If you see it as a hard line that defines humans as distinct from other things, then similar behavior that is exhibited by things that are "not supposed to" have anything like it has to be explained away, somehow. Hence the Chinese room argument etc.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]