3 ms·
> These models are obviously capable of acts of intelligence. Except they aren't. They are capable of language and pattern manipulation, and really good at i
by MarkusQ 3y ago
> These models are obviously capable of acts of intelligence.
Except they aren't. They are capable of language and pattern manipulation, and really good at it. But if you concoct a novel problem that isn't found anywhere on the internet and confront them with it, they fail absurdly. Even if it's something that a kid could figure out.
The Eliza effect strikes again!
- bryanlarsen 3y ago> But if you concoct a novel problem that isn't found anywhere on the internet and confront them with it, they fail absurdly. Often they do, but sometimes they don't. > Even if it's something that a kid could figure out. Intelligent and smart aren't synonyms. Modern LLM's are obviously pretty stupid at times, but even a human with an IQ of 65 has some intelligence.
- jncfhnb 3y ago> But if you concoct a novel problem that isn't found anywhere on the internet and confront them with it, they fail absurdly. Can you give an example?
- LorenDB 3y agoOf course not, because then the AI would get trained on the proper answer! /s
- yongjik 3y agoBut when LLM answers a logic or math question that no seven-year-old would figure out, would you flip the table and say this is the evidence that the seven-year-old is not intelligent? Otherwise, it sounds like circular reasoning, where we simply say "Of course a human being is intelligent because they are intelligent, and LLM is not because it isn't."
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- asadotzler 3y agoand also fails at math about 7% of the time which is abysmal compared to a $7 calculator that fails about 0.00000000001% of the time. that's far more discounting of intelligence than the times it gets the math right is affirming.