4 ms·
If chess ELO is the best proxy for general intelligence, then surely, even Deep Blue was smarter than any human alive? You can also claim that the best proxy f
by ACCount39 13d ago
If chess ELO is the best proxy for general intelligence, then surely, even Deep Blue was smarter than any human alive?
You can also claim that the best proxy for general intelligence is being able to multiply large numbers. In which case both humans and LLMs lose resoundingly to an old Casio.
Pick a piss poor metric - get a piss poor result.
Also, LeCun is a fool and his "world model" approach has consistently failed to yield any advantages over either the "pure imitation learning" or modern "imitation learning annealed by RL", but that's an aside.
- carodgers 13d agoChess ELO is not a proxy for general intelligence because many intelligent people choose to learn things other than chess. But any intelligent person can, if they choose, learn chess and play it well. LLMs cannot do this. They still play very poorly relative to human pros, and even modern LLMs still understand the rules so poorly that they request illegal moves. Anyone claiming that we should be afraid of a text generator that can't understand the rules of chess is being ridiculous.
- ACCount39 13d agoYou picked a piss poor metric and you are getting piss poor results. You can absolutely train an LLM-based model to be superhuman at chess. We just don't care enough to do so. LLMs being even as good at implicitly tracking chess board states as they currently are is an emergent capability. The difficulty wasn't in "understanding rules of chess" in a long while now.
- carodgers 13d ago"You picked a piss poor metric and you are getting piss poor results." Well, we agree that the results are piss poor, at least.