4 ms·
Yeah, it's bizarre. Are we not simply employing statistics when we deduce that yes, if we release our grip, the smartphone will fall to the floor? You wouldn'
by throwaway22032 3y ago
Yeah, it's bizarre.
Are we not simply employing statistics when we deduce that yes, if we release our grip, the smartphone will fall to the floor?
You wouldn't have to ever see a phone drop in order to know that, and neither would you have to study or know of the terminology of gravity.
It comes from the statistical knowledge that all things fall when not blocked.
- 1000thVisitor 3y agoThe key here is abstraction, not statistics. You have seen other items fall and are able to abstract this and then apply it to the phone.
- sharemywin 3y ago1. Rule of probability: The concept of statistics is being used to predict outcomes based on previous observations or experiences, such as the likelihood of an object falling when released. 2. Rule of inherent knowledge: Some understanding or knowledge, like objects falling when not supported, can be known without explicit study or exposure to the specific terminology (e.g., gravity). 3. Rule of generalization: Observations or experiences with one type of object (e.g., a smartphone) can be generalized to other objects or situations, as long as they share similar characteristics (e.g., not being supported). 4. Rule of causality: There is an implied cause-and-effect relationship between an action (releasing the grip) and an outcome (the smartphone falling to the floor). 5. Rule of experiential learning: Knowledge can be gained through direct experiences, even if the specific terms or scientific concepts are not known.
- thom 3y agoWhy would LLMs not learn abstractions when given millions of of concrete examples?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]