3 ms·

Right... And you think language models can't pass this sort of test ? Because they clearly can. And by the way, performance improvement after empathetic words

Right... And you think language models can't pass this sort of test ? Because they clearly can. And by the way, performance improvement after empathetic words is about the most robust mental model of emotion and empathy you can expect. That doesn't have anything to do with rephrasing or summarizing anything.

lxgr 3y ago
Are you arguing that LLMs experience emotions and are capable of empathy?
- famouswaffles 3y ago
  They are capable of empathy yes because any way we know how to demonstrate empathy shows this. That's the standard we apply for people so that's the standard for LLMs as well. You keep saying, "being able to talk about doesn't mean" but that's pointless when that's not the only understanding tests people employ. The paper i linked shows empathy understanding and has nothing to do with talking about empathy
  - lxgr 3y ago
    By that definition, a sociopath has empathy because they are able to demonstrate behavior we associate with having empathy. The two are not the same. In many cases, internal states don't matter (e.g. I don't care if I get a well-written summary of an article by a domain expert or just a good copywriter, as long as the meaning is preserved accurately enough), but I'd argue that we can't meaningfully talk about empathy without considering internal states.
    - famouswaffles 3y ago
      If a sociopath could demonstrate all the behavior we associate with empathy including the right responses and actions then i'm extremely comfortable saying that sociopath understands empathy and any other conclusion is bogus and makes no sense. Internal processes don't matter. Only results. If this hypothetical sociopath was able to respond exactly like any empathetic person in any scenario then there is no actual distinction. In reality of course, the sociopath would slip up somewhere. But that just proves my point, real distinctions manifest in results. If it can't then it's not meaningful.
      - lxgr 3y ago
        But internal processes determine the results, and being able to (somewhat) predict them is arguably an important basis of human interactions and by extension society. You're essentially saying that theory of mind is either pointless or does not exist; scientific and just observational day-to-day evidence says otherwise. > real distinctions manifest in results Yes, but only in some situations. If the situation is a test, a significantly specialized and/or advanced intelligence will be able to cheat it and be able to conceal its internal distinctions.

lxgr 3y ago

Are you arguing that LLMs experience emotions and are capable of empathy?

famouswaffles 3y ago
They are capable of empathy yes because any way we know how to demonstrate empathy shows this. That's the standard we apply for people so that's the standard for LLMs as well. You keep saying, "being able to talk about doesn't mean" but that's pointless when that's not the only understanding tests people employ. The paper i linked shows empathy understanding and has nothing to do with talking about empathy
- lxgr 3y ago
  By that definition, a sociopath has empathy because they are able to demonstrate behavior we associate with having empathy. The two are not the same. In many cases, internal states don't matter (e.g. I don't care if I get a well-written summary of an article by a domain expert or just a good copywriter, as long as the meaning is preserved accurately enough), but I'd argue that we can't meaningfully talk about empathy without considering internal states.
  - famouswaffles 3y ago
    If a sociopath could demonstrate all the behavior we associate with empathy including the right responses and actions then i'm extremely comfortable saying that sociopath understands empathy and any other conclusion is bogus and makes no sense. Internal processes don't matter. Only results. If this hypothetical sociopath was able to respond exactly like any empathetic person in any scenario then there is no actual distinction. In reality of course, the sociopath would slip up somewhere. But that just proves my point, real distinctions manifest in results. If it can't then it's not meaningful.
    - lxgr 3y ago
      But internal processes determine the results, and being able to (somewhat) predict them is arguably an important basis of human interactions and by extension society. You're essentially saying that theory of mind is either pointless or does not exist; scientific and just observational day-to-day evidence says otherwise. > real distinctions manifest in results Yes, but only in some situations. If the situation is a test, a significantly specialized and/or advanced intelligence will be able to cheat it and be able to conceal its internal distinctions.