3 ms·
Modern ML is old school mad science. The lifeblood of the field is proof-of-concept pre-prints built on top of other proof-of-concept pre-prints.
by ACCount37 8mo ago
Modern ML is old school mad science.
The lifeblood of the field is proof-of-concept pre-prints built on top of other proof-of-concept pre-prints.
- emp17344 8mo agoSounds like you agree this “evidence” lacks any semblance of scientific rigor?
- mrbungie 8mo ago(Not GP) There was a well recognized reproducibility problem in the ML field before LLM-mania, and that's considering published papers with proper peer-reviews. The current state of afairs in some ways is even less rigourous than that, and then some people in the field feel free to overextend their conclusions into other fields like neurosciences.
- ACCount37 8mo agoFrankly, I don't see a reason to give a shit. We're in the "mad science" regime because the current speed of progress means adding rigor would sacrifice velocity. Preprints are the lifeblood of the field because preprints can be put out there earlier and start contributing earlier. Anthropic, much as you hate them, has some of the best mechanistic interpretability researchers and AI wranglers across the entire industry. When they find things, they find things. Your "not scientifically rigorous" is just a flimsy excuse to dismiss the findings that make you deeply uncomfortable.