That doesn't seem that impressive. The likelihood of reading text having "sphere" in the same context (i.e. within some small number of tokens) as "roll away" is higher than by random chance, because humans have observed and described this behavior in text. There's no indication that GPT4 understands what "roll away" means in any meaningful way: just that it associates the phrase with the word "sphere". It might have chosen "bounce away" instead, and been equally unimpressive.
For now I say: LLMs have extremely broad knowledge but shallow. Anything you find that is deep is likely scraped from millioms humans recording insights somewhere.
But what I am most interested by is the degree of its symbolic manipulation and abstract reasoning given messy data. How is that not intelligence ?
Comments
That doesn't seem that impressive. The likelihood of reading text having "sphere" in the same context (i.e. within some small number of tokens) as "roll away" is higher than by random chance, because humans have observed and described this behavior in text. There's no indication that GPT4 understands what "roll away" means in any meaningful way: just that it associates the phrase with the word "sphere". It might have chosen "bounce away" instead, and been equally unimpressive.
For now I say: LLMs have extremely broad knowledge but shallow. Anything you find that is deep is likely scraped from millioms humans recording insights somewhere.
But what I am most interested by is the degree of its symbolic manipulation and abstract reasoning given messy data. How is that not intelligence ?