4 ms·

I remember playing around with GPT-2. I was absolutely amazed to see that it knew some characters from Dota 2 or Supreme Commander. I thought damn this thing ha

by golol 3y ago

I remember playing around with GPT-2. I was absolutely amazed to see that it knew some characters from Dota 2 or Supreme Commander. I thought damn this thing has a whole world model inside, because it can clearly memorize concepts and talk about then in a flexible/ approximate way. This requires remembering not just the things but also the dynamics of and relations between those things. Since it can talk about them freely, it must have done that to at least some degree. Getting to an accurate world model is then just a quantitative step. I am surprised some people still think LLMs don't have any kind of world model.

k__ 3y ago
They obviously have some kind of world model. The problem with AI is just that these models aren't as intuitive as they might seem.
flir 3y ago
Seems to me it's a text model, not a world model. Like... they can't feel the word "hungry", but they've got a damn good idea where the word "hungry" appears in the phase space that is the set of all meaningful human utterances. Their ground truth is text, not reality. Maybe that's why the model gets shaky when asked to reason about the real world. They are, after all, pretty great at reasoning about words (eg 'I need a word that means "a thing made out of clay", but not "pottery"' -> '"Ceramic" is a suitable word. It refers to items made from clay and hardened by heat.) (Edit: Inspired by the article, I just asked ChatGPT4 "When a knife falls to the ground, what are the possible outcomes?" ten times. It included "it lands point first and it sticks" 2 out of 10. GPT4 via the AI included it 6 out of 10, and also included some fairly creative-but-unlikely outcomes ("If the knife falls near an electrical outlet or cord, it could potentially cause an electrical shock or fire.")).
- golol 3y ago
  It is largely a text-only model, but tiny amounts of information from other modalities are indeed represented in the text. The best example is GPT-4's drawing ability. From text only it might theoretically be possible to infer to some degree how our physical world works, but it should be extremely difficult in practice. That's why we we'll need multimodal models obv. But my intuition is that understanding captioned youtubes with a transformer should work just as well as LLMs do, it's just a matter of scale. I think a 100-1000x GPT-4 sized video model could model let's say 50ms frame rate videos pretty well, in the sense that you can watch minutes of video (vs read minutes of text) and the video looks reasonably realistic and preserves coherence/context over the duration. We just don't have the amount of compute necessary yet, so we have to be smarter with multimodality.
  - flir 3y ago
    You mean the SVG-generation stuff? I'm not convinced that's not just another form of text. It can "speak SVG" like it can "speak German". I spent a fair amount of time asking it to draw me SVGs of fish, and the results suggested "there's always a triangle, there's always a circle", not "it's got a tail and an eye, and they're connected to the body". It didn't seem to understand the relationships between the components. Could be wrong though. > But my intuition is that understanding captioned youtubes with a transformer should work just as well as LLMs do Wouldn't that be amazing. Bring it on, Google.
    - golol 3y ago
      I know what you mean, but at some point when I played with it it could reasonably modify an image based on queries. Like, if I asked it to add smoke to the house's chimney, it would put grey blobs above the house, or if I asked it to give the cat a tail, it would put it roughly at the end. For me that's kind of a very rudimentary picture understanding, although I know it's a stretch.
      - flir 3y ago
        Now that you mention it, I had the same experience - I asked it to draw the Mona Lisa, add a background, folded hands, stuff like that. Ok, yeah, I don't know what to make of that.
    - nomel 3y ago
      > It didn't seem to understand the relationships between the components. Could be wrong though. There is evidence that you are wrong: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbIk7-JPB2c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbIk7-JPB2c Unfortunately, the "alignment tax" is a heavy one.
- truculent 3y ago
  Some people are born without the ability to feel pain. Do they also lack a world model?
  - Yiin 3y ago
    They lack a world model that describes feeling of pain, yes.
    - truculent 3y ago
      Okay, but it’s still a world model, just slightly different in kind? What about multi-modal models that are trained on text and images? What about something trained on images, audio, sensorimotor inputs? At what point does that change? Didn’t the world produce the text (albeit indirectly), just as it does the inputs to our own experience?
      - flir 3y ago
        I think you've argued successfully that there's a sliding scale here. I guess the more experience they get of physics, the better they'll get at predicting physical things.
sgt101 3y ago
Does reddit have a world model?
- golol 3y ago
  Depends how you define the reddit model, but I think the model [question -> post question on reddit -> select top reply after 1 day -> answer] does have a world model. (It uses the world models of reddit users obv.)

by golol 3y ago

k__ 3y ago

They obviously have some kind of world model. The problem with AI is just that these models aren't as intuitive as they might seem.

flir 3y ago

Seems to me it's a text model, not a world model. Like... they can't feel the word "hungry", but they've got a damn good idea where the word "hungry" appears in the phase space that is the set of all meaningful human utterances. Their ground truth is text, not reality. Maybe that's why the model gets shaky when asked to reason about the real world. They are, after all, pretty great at reasoning about words (eg 'I need a word that means "a thing made out of clay", but not "pottery"' -> '"Ceramic" is a suitable word. It refers to items made from clay and hardened by heat.) (Edit: Inspired by the article, I just asked ChatGPT4 "When a knife falls to the ground, what are the possible outcomes?" ten times. It included "it lands point first and it sticks" 2 out of 10. GPT4 via the AI included it 6 out of 10, and also included some fairly creative-but-unlikely outcomes ("If the knife falls near an electrical outlet or cord, it could potentially cause an electrical shock or fire.")).

golol 3y ago
It is largely a text-only model, but tiny amounts of information from other modalities are indeed represented in the text. The best example is GPT-4's drawing ability. From text only it might theoretically be possible to infer to some degree how our physical world works, but it should be extremely difficult in practice. That's why we we'll need multimodal models obv. But my intuition is that understanding captioned youtubes with a transformer should work just as well as LLMs do, it's just a matter of scale. I think a 100-1000x GPT-4 sized video model could model let's say 50ms frame rate videos pretty well, in the sense that you can watch minutes of video (vs read minutes of text) and the video looks reasonably realistic and preserves coherence/context over the duration. We just don't have the amount of compute necessary yet, so we have to be smarter with multimodality.
- flir 3y ago
  You mean the SVG-generation stuff? I'm not convinced that's not just another form of text. It can "speak SVG" like it can "speak German". I spent a fair amount of time asking it to draw me SVGs of fish, and the results suggested "there's always a triangle, there's always a circle", not "it's got a tail and an eye, and they're connected to the body". It didn't seem to understand the relationships between the components. Could be wrong though. > But my intuition is that understanding captioned youtubes with a transformer should work just as well as LLMs do Wouldn't that be amazing. Bring it on, Google.
  - golol 3y ago
    I know what you mean, but at some point when I played with it it could reasonably modify an image based on queries. Like, if I asked it to add smoke to the house's chimney, it would put grey blobs above the house, or if I asked it to give the cat a tail, it would put it roughly at the end. For me that's kind of a very rudimentary picture understanding, although I know it's a stretch.
    - flir 3y ago
      Now that you mention it, I had the same experience - I asked it to draw the Mona Lisa, add a background, folded hands, stuff like that. Ok, yeah, I don't know what to make of that.
  - nomel 3y ago
    > It didn't seem to understand the relationships between the components. Could be wrong though. There is evidence that you are wrong: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbIk7-JPB2c https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbIk7-JPB2c Unfortunately, the "alignment tax" is a heavy one.
truculent 3y ago
Some people are born without the ability to feel pain. Do they also lack a world model?
- Yiin 3y ago
  They lack a world model that describes feeling of pain, yes.
  - truculent 3y ago
    Okay, but it’s still a world model, just slightly different in kind? What about multi-modal models that are trained on text and images? What about something trained on images, audio, sensorimotor inputs? At what point does that change? Didn’t the world produce the text (albeit indirectly), just as it does the inputs to our own experience?
    - flir 3y ago
      I think you've argued successfully that there's a sliding scale here. I guess the more experience they get of physics, the better they'll get at predicting physical things.

sgt101 3y ago

Does reddit have a world model?

golol 3y ago
Depends how you define the reddit model, but I think the model [question -> post question on reddit -> select top reply after 1 day -> answer] does have a world model. (It uses the world models of reddit users obv.)