2 ms·

Your explanation perfectly captures another big differences between human / mammal intelligence and LLM intelligence: A child can make mistakes and (few shot) l

Your explanation perfectly captures another big differences between human / mammal intelligence and LLM intelligence: A child can make mistakes and (few shot) learn. A LLM can’t. And even a child struggling with spelling won’t make a mistake like the one I have described. It will spell things wrong and not even catch the spelling mistake. But it won’t pretend and insist there is a mistake where there isn’t (okay, maybe it will, but only to troll you). Maybe talking about “real” intelligence was not precise enough and it’s better to talk about “mammal like intelligence.” I guess there is a chance LLMs can be trained to a level where all the questions where there is a correct answer for (basically everything that can be benchmarked) will be answered correctly. Would this be incredibly useful and make a lot of jobs obsolete? Yes. Still a very different form of intelligence.

LordDragonfang 1y ago
> A child can make mistakes and (few shot) learn. A LLM can’t. Considering that we literally call the process of giving an llm several attempts at a problem "few-shot reasoning", I do not understand your reasoning here. And LLM absolutely can "gain acquire knowledge of or skill in (something)" of things within its context window (i.e. learning). And then you can bake those understandings in by making a LoRa, or further training. If this is really your distinction that makes intelligence, the only difference between llms and human brains is that human brains have a built-in mechanism to convert short-term memory to long-term, and llms haven't fully evolved that.