4 ms·
The reality with people is that most of them don't come close to Einstein level intelligence. A lot of the stuff I ask perplexity or chatgpt is way beyond what
by jillesvangurp 2y ago
The reality with people is that most of them don't come close to Einstein level intelligence. A lot of the stuff I ask perplexity or chatgpt is way beyond what I could reasonably ask from the vast majority of people I know. I love my relatives. But they are kind of useless for the vast majority of stuff that bounces around in my head.
AIs are at this point a useful tool for knowledge workers. They don't replace them but enhance their productivity. For scientific work, having an LLM that is trained on essentially all of the scientific work published, ever (until the cutoff date) is probably useful.
You can now have conversations with an AI about cross referencing your ideas with existing work. You might analyze a paper you are writing and ask it to summarize key claims, criticize those, and your methodology, cross reference claims with literature, etc. Find counter points to your claims, etc. And you could probably use it to come up with interesting follow up questions, let it formulate hypotheses and ways to verify those, etc. Most scientific work isn't Archimedes going Eureka while taking a bath but undergraduates, post docs, and other under paid research stuff grinding through piles and piles of existing work and filling their heads with enough information until finally something new and original pops out.
I got my Ph. D. in 2003. I'm part of the first generation of researchers that was able to use Google. At the time that was a huge enabler for tracking down obscure references and authors. Getting a paper published involves an enormous amount of what I just outlined. And LLMs can assist you with that. Will it hallucinate. Absolutely. But it will also dig out valid points, references, etc. Sorting that out is still work that you need to do. But it probably saves a lot of time. Will it propose original new theories. Maybe, maybe not. But it will speed up the process of zooming in on unanswered ones.
Science isn't necessarily about coming up with answers but coming up with interesting questions. That's what Einstein did: ask interesting questions. Researchers are still trying to answer some of them and verifying some of the answers he predicted.
- zombot 2y ago> At the time that was a huge enabler for tracking down obscure references and authors. Would that still work today, in the highly commercialized and highly sanitized/censored internet? Where Google wouldn't show you those search results because they aren't profitable enough? And how do you even train an LLM on a fair representation of human knowledge when you only find stuff that is mainstream and commercially viable?
- jillesvangurp 2y agoSure, Google Scholar is still a good resource. And if you jump an article link into Google, it will likely find you a link to that. I don't see how that would not work today. These days there are other tools as well. I use Perplexity a lot currently. Not for scientific work because I don't do that anymore but it would work great for that as well. And I'm sure modern day researchers have their favorite tools that I'm not even aware off.