2 ms·
I don’t think anyone who upvoted this has read more than one sentence of this paper.
by rrr_oh_man 2y ago
I don’t think anyone who upvoted this has read more than one sentence of this paper.
- ricardobeat 2y agoIt’s interesting even if not true or correct. You could also choose to enrich the discussion by elaborating on why you think this is worthless instead.
- nickvec 2y agoI have a hard time giving worth to a paper whose first sentence fails to spell intelligence correctly.
- pizza 2y agoIn a mathematical conversation, someone suggested to Grothendieck that they should consider a particular prime number. “You mean an actual number?” Grothendieck asked. The other person replied, yes, an actual prime number. Grothendieck suggested, “All right, take 57.” Might I suggest Postel's Law?
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]
- melvinmelih 2y agoThis paper has been available for a few weeks, and I wrote an article [1] exploring how to apply its inner workings to the design of multi-agent systems. If you can design "reasoning" at the model level, you can also design "reasoning" in larger, more complex systems using the same principles. https://melvintercan.com/p/lessons-from-reasoning-designing https://melvintercan.com/p/lessons-from-reasoning-designing