4 ms·

It’s like every single sentence you just wrote is incorrect? 1. You’re making up some weird goalposts here of what it means to reason. It’s not reasoning unles

It’s like every single sentence you just wrote is incorrect? 1. You’re making up some weird goalposts here of what it means to reason. It’s not reasoning unless it can access the internet to search for parts? No. That has nothing to do with reasoning. You just think it would be cool if it could do that. 2. “Can figure out stuff without being trained on it” That’s exactly what it’s doing in the cypher example. It wasn’t trained to know that that input meant the corresponding output through the cypher. Emergent reasoning through autocomplete, sure, but that’s still reasoning. 3. “Forward only”. If that was the case then back and forth conversations with the llm would be pointless. It wouldn’t be able to improve upon previous answers it gave you when you give it new details. But that’s not how it works. If tell it one thing, then separately tell it another thing, it can change its original conclusion based on your new input. 4. Even desolate your convoluted test for reasoning, ChatGPT CAN do what you asked… even using the internet to look up parts it can either do out of the box or could do if given a plug-in to allow that.

ActorNightly 2y ago
Ill give you a more formal definition. A model can be said as reasoning, when it can use existing information to figure out new data that has not been in the training set. Here is a better example - lets say your input is 6 pictures of some object from each of the cardinal viewpoints, and you tell model these are the views and ask it how much it weighs. The model should basically figure out how to create a 3d shape and compute a camera view, and iterate until the camera view matches the pictures, then figure out that the shape can be hollow or solid, and to compute the weight you need the density, and that it should prompt the user for it if it cannot determine the true value for those from the information and its trained dataset. And it should do it without any specific training that this is the right way to do this, because it should be able to figure out this way through breaking the problem down into abstract representations of sub problems, and then figuring out how to solve those through basic logic, a.k.a reasoning. What that looks like, I don't know. If I did I would certainly have my own AI company. But i can tell you for certain we are not even close to figuring it out yet, because everyone is still stuck on transformers, like multiplying matricies together is some groundbreaking thing. In the cypher example, all its doing is basically using a separate model to break a particular model into chain of thought, and prompting that. And there is plenty in the training set of GPT about decrypting cyphers. >Forward only What I mean is that when its generate a response, the computation happens on a snapshot from input to output, trying to map a set of tokens, into a set of tokens. Model doesn't operate on a context larger than the window. Humans don't do this. We operate on a large context, with lots of previous information compressed, and furthermore, we don't just compute words, we compute complex abstract ideas that we then can translate into words. >even using the internet to look up parts it can either do out of the box or could do if given a plug-in to allow that. So apparently the way to AI is to manually code all the capability into LLMS? Give me a break. Just like with Chat GPT4, when people were screaming about how its the birth of true AI, give this model a year, it will find some niche use cases (depending on cost), and then nobody is going give a fuck about it, just like nobody is really doing anything groundbreaking with GPT4.
- BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
  Your conclusion is absurd. If you agree this model is overall an improvement on the prior one, ie performs better on the same tasks and can do tasks the previous one couldn’t, it’s basically a given that it will get more use than GPT4
  - ActorNightly 2y ago
    Better in niche areas doesn't mean its going to get more use. Everyone was super hyped about all the "cool" stuff that GPT4 could solve, but in the end, you still can't do things like give it a bunch of requirements for a website, let it run, and get a full codebase back, even though that is well within its capabilities. You have to spend time with prompting in to get it to give you what you want, and in a lot of cases, you are better off just typing the code yourself (because you can visualize the entire project in your head and make the right decisions about how to structure stuff), and using it for small code generations. This model is not going to radically change that. It will be able to give you some answers that you had to specifically manually prompt before automatically, but there is no advanced reasoning going on.
    - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
      What is “advanced reasoning” and why isn’t this doing it? If you made a chinese room to output coherent chains of reasoning, it would functionally be equally useful to an actual reasoner, with or without the capacity for sentience or whatever.
      - ActorNightly 2y ago
        Basically, if you had a model that could reason, it should be able to figure out new infromation. I.e lets say you map some bytes of the output to an api for creating a tcp socket and communicating over it. The model should be able figure out how to go out on the internet and search for information, all by itself, without any explicit training on how to do that. So without prior information, it should be able to esentially start out with random sequences in those bytes, and seeing what the output is, then eventually identify and remember patterns that come out. Which means there has to be some internal reward function for someting that differentiates good results from bad results, and some memory that the model has to remember what good results are, and eventually a map of how to get information that it needs (the model would probably stumble across Google or ChatGPT at some point and time after figuring out http protocol, and remember it as a very good way to get info) Philosophically, I don't even know if this is solvable. It could be that we just through enough compute at all iterations of architectures in some form of genetic algorithm, and one of the results ends up being good.

ActorNightly 2y ago

Ill give you a more formal definition. A model can be said as reasoning, when it can use existing information to figure out new data that has not been in the training set. Here is a better example - lets say your input is 6 pictures of some object from each of the cardinal viewpoints, and you tell model these are the views and ask it how much it weighs. The model should basically figure out how to create a 3d shape and compute a camera view, and iterate until the camera view matches the pictures, then figure out that the shape can be hollow or solid, and to compute the weight you need the density, and that it should prompt the user for it if it cannot determine the true value for those from the information and its trained dataset. And it should do it without any specific training that this is the right way to do this, because it should be able to figure out this way through breaking the problem down into abstract representations of sub problems, and then figuring out how to solve those through basic logic, a.k.a reasoning. What that looks like, I don't know. If I did I would certainly have my own AI company. But i can tell you for certain we are not even close to figuring it out yet, because everyone is still stuck on transformers, like multiplying matricies together is some groundbreaking thing. In the cypher example, all its doing is basically using a separate model to break a particular model into chain of thought, and prompting that. And there is plenty in the training set of GPT about decrypting cyphers. >Forward only What I mean is that when its generate a response, the computation happens on a snapshot from input to output, trying to map a set of tokens, into a set of tokens. Model doesn't operate on a context larger than the window. Humans don't do this. We operate on a large context, with lots of previous information compressed, and furthermore, we don't just compute words, we compute complex abstract ideas that we then can translate into words. >even using the internet to look up parts it can either do out of the box or could do if given a plug-in to allow that. So apparently the way to AI is to manually code all the capability into LLMS? Give me a break. Just like with Chat GPT4, when people were screaming about how its the birth of true AI, give this model a year, it will find some niche use cases (depending on cost), and then nobody is going give a fuck about it, just like nobody is really doing anything groundbreaking with GPT4.

BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
Your conclusion is absurd. If you agree this model is overall an improvement on the prior one, ie performs better on the same tasks and can do tasks the previous one couldn’t, it’s basically a given that it will get more use than GPT4
- ActorNightly 2y ago
  Better in niche areas doesn't mean its going to get more use. Everyone was super hyped about all the "cool" stuff that GPT4 could solve, but in the end, you still can't do things like give it a bunch of requirements for a website, let it run, and get a full codebase back, even though that is well within its capabilities. You have to spend time with prompting in to get it to give you what you want, and in a lot of cases, you are better off just typing the code yourself (because you can visualize the entire project in your head and make the right decisions about how to structure stuff), and using it for small code generations. This model is not going to radically change that. It will be able to give you some answers that you had to specifically manually prompt before automatically, but there is no advanced reasoning going on.
  - BriggyDwiggs42 2y ago
    What is “advanced reasoning” and why isn’t this doing it? If you made a chinese room to output coherent chains of reasoning, it would functionally be equally useful to an actual reasoner, with or without the capacity for sentience or whatever.
    - ActorNightly 2y ago
      Basically, if you had a model that could reason, it should be able to figure out new infromation. I.e lets say you map some bytes of the output to an api for creating a tcp socket and communicating over it. The model should be able figure out how to go out on the internet and search for information, all by itself, without any explicit training on how to do that. So without prior information, it should be able to esentially start out with random sequences in those bytes, and seeing what the output is, then eventually identify and remember patterns that come out. Which means there has to be some internal reward function for someting that differentiates good results from bad results, and some memory that the model has to remember what good results are, and eventually a map of how to get information that it needs (the model would probably stumble across Google or ChatGPT at some point and time after figuring out http protocol, and remember it as a very good way to get info) Philosophically, I don't even know if this is solvable. It could be that we just through enough compute at all iterations of architectures in some form of genetic algorithm, and one of the results ends up being good.