4 ms·
I was wondering why nobody combines LLMs with well-known symbolic AI like CYC[1]. Or, perhaps I'm wrong and plenty of companies are working on it. [1] https://
by jonathanstrange 4y ago
I was wondering why nobody combines LLMs with well-known symbolic AI like CYC[1]. Or, perhaps I'm wrong and plenty of companies are working on it.
[1] https://cyc.com/ https://cyc.com/
- simonh 4y agoIt depends what you mean by combine. They work in fundamentally different ways. It's a bit like combining an internal combustion engine with a ramjet. You might be able to compose systems that use LLMs for some sub-components and symbolic AI for other functions. So for example if ChatGPT gets asked a question that LLMs are poor at but symbolic systems are good at, it could switch to using a symbolic system, but that's not really combining the actual technologies.
- pohl 4y agoI’ve had similar thoughts, wondering why LLMs aren’t just a component of a larger system, perhaps used to generate “thoughts” that are then tested by some other subsystems, which in turn may re-fire the LLMs to generate more. I guess I’m imagining that testing the LLM output might be a problem that some other technique might be suited for, and smells like what we need to mitigate LLM weaknesses.
- jonathanstrange 4y agoWhat I had in mind was to make the output of a natural language parser into symbolic semantic representations (the folks at CYC have such parsers) an additional part of the training data set of the LLM.