3 ms·
These aren't mystery systems. While the sheer volume of data makes individual outputs difficult to understand how they were derived, the systems operation are w
by hackcasual 3y ago
These aren't mystery systems. While the sheer volume of data makes individual outputs difficult to understand how they were derived, the systems operation are well understood. These are statistical models of language. They don't have the ability to reason or reflect. Hence bullshit. It'll be interesting to see if the work around augmenting/plugins is able to reduce the amount of bullshitting, but I suspect the sophistication mis-match between LLMs and supervisory systems means there will always be a baseline level of bullshit.
- famouswaffles 3y ago>the systems operation are well understood That's like saying human behavior is well understood because we know how neurons communicate signals. It's too low level to be useful, hence psychology. >They don't have the ability to reason or reflect. Yes they do https://selfrefine.info/ https://selfrefine.info/ https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.11366 https://arxiv.org/abs/2303.11366
- ShamelessC 3y agoAmazes me how much this is downvoted despite providing citations and being essentially correct (barring a tedious philosophical debate and assuming good faith) - and in a thread specifically calling out "armchair ML experts"!
- runningStone 3y agoso...can we split knowledge part and reasoning/improving/refining part, and make LLM to smaller one?
- famouswaffles 3y agoTheoretically...maybe. But even if you could genuinely separate reasoning from knowledge, we simply don't know how.