3 ms·
> there is a lot of evidence that many of the concepts ARC-AGI is (allegedly) measuring are innate in humans I'd argue that "innate" here still includes a brai
by Ukv 2y ago
> there is a lot of evidence that many of the concepts ARC-AGI is (allegedly) measuring are innate in humans
I'd argue that "innate" here still includes a brain structure/nervous system that evolved on 3.5 billion years worth of data. Extensive pre-training of one kind or another currently seems the best way to achieve generality.
- onemoresoop 2y agoSure and LLMs ain’t nothing of this sort. While they’re an incredible feat in technology, they’re just a building block for intelligence, an important building block I’d say.
- SiempreViernes 2y agoSo all billons spent finding tricks and architectures that perfom well haven't resulted in any durable structures in contemporary LLMs? Each new training from scratch is a perfect blank slate and the only thing ensuring words come out is the size of the corpus?
- Ukv 2y ago> Each new training from scratch is a perfect blank slate [...]? I don't think training runs are done entirely from scratch. Most training runs in practice will start from some pretrained weights or distill an existing model - taking some model pretrained on ImageNet or Common Crawl and fine-tuning it to a specific task. But even when the weights are randomly initialized, the hyperparameters and architectural choices (skip connections, attention, ...) will have been copied from previous models/papers by what performed well empirically, sometimes also based on trying to transfer our own intuition (like stacking convolutional layers as a rough approximation of our visual system), and possibly refined/mutated through some grid search/neural architecture search on data.