4 ms·
There's simply no scientific basis for equating the skills of a transformer model to a human of any age or skill. They work so differently, that it makes absolu
by jazzysnake 2y ago
There's simply no scientific basis for equating the skills of a transformer model to a human of any age or skill. They work so differently, that it makes absolutely zero sense. GPTs fail at playing simple tic-tac-toe like games, which is definitely not a smart highschooler level of intelligence. It can write a very sophishticated summary of scientific papers, which is way above high-schooler level. The basis of this article is so deeply flawed that the whole thing makes no sense.
- mritchie712 2y agowhere have you seen GPT-4 fail at tic-tac-toe?
- jazzysnake 2y agoAdmittedly, I have not tried this recently, but less than a year ago GPT4 seems to have struggled quite a bit. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35216614 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35216614 It does not make my point moot however. Take a look at the ARC challenge. Simple reasoning tasks that the models have not yet seen: https://arcprize.org/play?task=00576224 https://arcprize.org/play?task=00576224 All models fail miserably on this, because they rely more on memorization and less on logic or reasoning. Simply cherry picking strikingly good responses like the author did proves nothing about model intelligence. I am pretty confident however, that after a couple tries a highschooler could do these types of tasks without issue.