5 ms·

What makes the "agents". From what I can tell, they don't perform any external actions. I would call these chatbots...

by cjonas 2y ago

qqqult 2y ago
"AI agent" -> LLM with function calling is the new "AI" -> LLM
petesergeant 2y ago
I don’t (at very brief glance) see either agentic or workflow code there, I think it’s up to the users of the library to bring their own agents? (this being the only sensible terminology definition I’ve seen for which has very definitely been a “fund my startup” marketing term until now: https://www.anthropic.com/research/building-effective-agents https://www.anthropic.com/research/building-effective-agents)
- cjonas 2y ago
  Ya, these are the definitions I'd use. While all "Agentic" system will likely use some form of function calling, not all function calling is "Agentic". Most implementations are more "Workflows" than "Agents".
Xen9 2y ago
Ypu would need mathematical theory of embedded agency to dig yourself up from the terminological hellhole.
- ratedgene 2y ago
  can you point me to some materials that are easy to digest?
  - sadboi31 2y ago
    Easy to digest to me is a matter of process plus order. Just because you can boof wine/ai and feel a greater high than if you just took a sip doesn't mean you should. I'd start by setting the table and throwing out your last meal. start over in the 60s and work forward. stafford beer on cybernetics (also worth mention, norbert weiner): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ6orMfmorg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ6orMfmorg Lots of other people start w/ other things but i'm a mgmt minded person so a social engineering + psychology + anthropology oriented lens has always been my anchor. My first real intro to math where everything clicked was w/ primitive graph theory as it were 2000+ years ago. From there, algebra, geometry, trig, calc, etc# started clicking.
    - ratedgene 2y ago
      love norbert weiner, fantastic. the great cyberneticians of their times were such far future forward visionaries it's a bit astounding.
  - Xen9 2y ago
    A. Demski's illustrated, more blog-style (rather than papers) works online.
    - Xen9 2y ago
      What I mean is that we want something like set theory merged with weak computability theory (e.g. Kolmogorov complexity) but set means environment, embdded agent means element inside set, and then everything else gets built on top of that theory. This may be a an infinitely large -feeling work because there are many rules & interactions & games, but you are essentially answer what does it mean to be a rational embdded agent that's part of an environment, that probably doesn't have the exact same wants, in the abstract & formal sense of the inquiry. Once you start examining scenarios where there are multiple clones of you that you perhaps cannot tell apart, your memory has been limited, you are facing larger amounts of pain & pleasure that you can handle without going insane, everyone wants the same thing but you also want something different, or someone gets mind-reading powers that might be partial and only work when they reveal their thoughts... then you are analytically working towards the end goal of building a larger catalogue of "everything" & making a theory & terminology out of that. I would dedicate 2-20 years on the formal work but there's no funding I could get I know of & besides couldn't promise to yield results since foundations yields no results until it does if it ever does. --- A related note: Kolmogorov complexity & finitism go along beautifully but the bit-lifting to calculate memory computational process takes insofar is out of my capacity. Nevertheless you can define a maximum number to ever allowed to exist in a system as Church number & have then perhaps the minimum amount of logical operations required to get there to be the maximum amount of memory your operations can take, closing the system since you lose memory in say substraction to a, b, the process initial size (hello, Kolmogorov) & process memory consumed at most (in any procedure, the smallest procedure being the number itself).
Thytu 2y ago
By default the "agent" is pretty limited in actions (only talking / and thinking). Currently it's up to the user to add its own actions, you can find an example where I gave the agents access to ChatGPT (cf link) Obviously, some default actions will be added in the future :D link to example: https://github.com/Thytu/Agentarium/blob/main/examples/3_adding_a_custom_action/demo.py https://github.com/Thytu/Agentarium/blob/main/examples/3_add...
JohnMakin 2y ago
> What makes the "agents" As most people understand them, a lot of marketing and imagination. There's some fairly dense theory on the underlying concept that is probably inaccessible to someone without a math degree, and much of this research happened well after my academic days so I cannot comment on a deep level, but I'm extremely skeptical of its attempted implementation in the current market, particularly when language models are at the core of it. From what I understand, an agentic system can exist entirely without LLM's and all the rube-goldberg machinations behind giving it the appearance of working. However, this is the course that every single tech company has gone all in on, so we'll see how it goes. I suspect that LLM's will be discarded in favor of something much better in the mid to far future, but the fact that no one can currently say what that is or even would look like is a little bit concerning to me when the large bets are being made that it will just happen inevitably in more near-future timelines.

What makes the "agents". From what I can tell, they don't perform any external actions. I would call these chatbots...

by cjonas 2y ago

What makes the "agents". From what I can tell, they don't perform any external actions. I would call these chatbots...

qqqult 2y ago

"AI agent" -> LLM with function calling is the new "AI" -> LLM

petesergeant 2y ago

I don’t (at very brief glance) see either agentic or workflow code there, I think it’s up to the users of the library to bring their own agents? (this being the only sensible terminology definition I’ve seen for which has very definitely been a “fund my startup” marketing term until now: https://www.anthropic.com/research/building-effective-agents https://www.anthropic.com/research/building-effective-agents)

cjonas 2y ago
Ya, these are the definitions I'd use. While all "Agentic" system will likely use some form of function calling, not all function calling is "Agentic". Most implementations are more "Workflows" than "Agents".

Xen9 2y ago

Ypu would need mathematical theory of embedded agency to dig yourself up from the terminological hellhole.

ratedgene 2y ago
can you point me to some materials that are easy to digest?
- sadboi31 2y ago
  Easy to digest to me is a matter of process plus order. Just because you can boof wine/ai and feel a greater high than if you just took a sip doesn't mean you should. I'd start by setting the table and throwing out your last meal. start over in the 60s and work forward. stafford beer on cybernetics (also worth mention, norbert weiner): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ6orMfmorg https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJ6orMfmorg Lots of other people start w/ other things but i'm a mgmt minded person so a social engineering + psychology + anthropology oriented lens has always been my anchor. My first real intro to math where everything clicked was w/ primitive graph theory as it were 2000+ years ago. From there, algebra, geometry, trig, calc, etc# started clicking.
  - ratedgene 2y ago
    love norbert weiner, fantastic. the great cyberneticians of their times were such far future forward visionaries it's a bit astounding.
- Xen9 2y ago
  A. Demski's illustrated, more blog-style (rather than papers) works online.
  - Xen9 2y ago
    What I mean is that we want something like set theory merged with weak computability theory (e.g. Kolmogorov complexity) but set means environment, embdded agent means element inside set, and then everything else gets built on top of that theory. This may be a an infinitely large -feeling work because there are many rules & interactions & games, but you are essentially answer what does it mean to be a rational embdded agent that's part of an environment, that probably doesn't have the exact same wants, in the abstract & formal sense of the inquiry. Once you start examining scenarios where there are multiple clones of you that you perhaps cannot tell apart, your memory has been limited, you are facing larger amounts of pain & pleasure that you can handle without going insane, everyone wants the same thing but you also want something different, or someone gets mind-reading powers that might be partial and only work when they reveal their thoughts... then you are analytically working towards the end goal of building a larger catalogue of "everything" & making a theory & terminology out of that. I would dedicate 2-20 years on the formal work but there's no funding I could get I know of & besides couldn't promise to yield results since foundations yields no results until it does if it ever does. --- A related note: Kolmogorov complexity & finitism go along beautifully but the bit-lifting to calculate memory computational process takes insofar is out of my capacity. Nevertheless you can define a maximum number to ever allowed to exist in a system as Church number & have then perhaps the minimum amount of logical operations required to get there to be the maximum amount of memory your operations can take, closing the system since you lose memory in say substraction to a, b, the process initial size (hello, Kolmogorov) & process memory consumed at most (in any procedure, the smallest procedure being the number itself).

Thytu 2y ago

By default the "agent" is pretty limited in actions (only talking / and thinking). Currently it's up to the user to add its own actions, you can find an example where I gave the agents access to ChatGPT (cf link) Obviously, some default actions will be added in the future :D link to example: https://github.com/Thytu/Agentarium/blob/main/examples/3_adding_a_custom_action/demo.py https://github.com/Thytu/Agentarium/blob/main/examples/3_add...

JohnMakin 2y ago

> What makes the "agents" As most people understand them, a lot of marketing and imagination. There's some fairly dense theory on the underlying concept that is probably inaccessible to someone without a math degree, and much of this research happened well after my academic days so I cannot comment on a deep level, but I'm extremely skeptical of its attempted implementation in the current market, particularly when language models are at the core of it. From what I understand, an agentic system can exist entirely without LLM's and all the rube-goldberg machinations behind giving it the appearance of working. However, this is the course that every single tech company has gone all in on, so we'll see how it goes. I suspect that LLM's will be discarded in favor of something much better in the mid to far future, but the fact that no one can currently say what that is or even would look like is a little bit concerning to me when the large bets are being made that it will just happen inevitably in more near-future timelines.