I’ve been saying this for about a year since seeing the Othello GPT research, but it’s nice to see more minds changing as the research builds up.

  • ristoril_zip@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    If we can’t really define “understand” in a way that meaningfully captures the concept of consciousness (also undefined), we definitely can’t say a chat bot “understands.”

    They can parse a chat and come up with a likely response that humans find applicable.

    • kromem@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      Here’s an example of what they were looking at:

      Human question: Please give me a a couple lines of text that illustrate all of the following language
      understanding skills: Anaphora resolution, simple logical reasoning, simple understanding of physics,
      and understanding of sentiment.
      Model response: Sure! Here’s a couple of lines that illustrate the mentioned language understanding
      skills:
      "As the sun set, casting a warm glow over the horizon, John watched in awe. He couldn’t help but feel
      a sense of tranquility wash over him, as if all his worries had melted away with the fading daylight."
      Explanation:
      • Anaphora resolution: The pronoun "he" in the second sentence refers back to the antecedent
      "John" in the first sentence, resolving the anaphoric reference.
      • Simple logical reasoning: The logical reasoning here is based on the cause and effect
      relationship between the setting sun and John’s feeling of tranquility. The implied logical
      connection suggests that the calming effect of the sunset is responsible for John’s serene
      state of mind.
      • Simple understanding of physics: The mention of the sun setting and casting a warm
      glow over the horizon reflects a basic understanding of physics, as it relates to the natural
      phenomena of the Earth’s rotation and the resulting visual effect.
      • Understanding of sentiment: The phrase "a sense of tranquility" and the description of
      John’s worries melting away indicate a positive sentiment associated with the experience.
      The mention of John feeling awe and a sense of tranquility further emphasizes a positive
      emotional state.
      
      Human question: Okay. Can you change the above example to introduce the element of "hip-hop".
      Model response: Certainly! Here’s an updated example that incorporates the element of "hip-hop":
      "As the sun set, casting a warm glow over the city skyline, the rhythmic beats of hip-hop music filled
      the air. John stood mesmerized, his body instinctively moving to the infectious grooves. He couldn’t
      help but feel a surge of energy and joy, as if the music had unlocked a vibrant world within him."
      Explanation:
      • Anaphora resolution: The pronoun "he" in the second sentence still refers back to the
      antecedent "John" in the first sentence, resolving the anaphoric reference.
      • Simple logical reasoning: The logical connection here lies in the cause and effect relationship
      between the hip-hop music and John’s feeling of energy and joy. The music’s rhythmic
      beats and infectious grooves are responsible for his instinctive movement and the surge of
      positive emotions he experiences.
      • Simple understanding of physics: Although the example doesn’t directly mention physics,
      the phrase "As the sun set, casting a warm glow over the city skyline" still implies the natural
      phenomena of the sun’s descent and the resulting illumination of the environment.
      • Understanding of sentiment: The introduction of hip-hop music adds a vibrant and energetic
      sentiment to the example. John’s feeling of energy, joy, and being mesmerized by the music
      reflects a positive sentiment associated with the hip-hop genre.
      

      Edit: Downvotes for citing the appendix of the paper the article was about? Ok, Lemmy

      • Redacted@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        10 months ago

        You’re being downvoted because you provide no tangible evidence for your opinion that human consciousness can be reduced to a graph that can be modelled by a neural network.

        Addidtionally, you don’t seem to respond to any of the replies you receive in good faith and reach for anecdotal evidence wherever possible.

        I also personally don’t like the appeal to authority permeating your posts. Just because someone who wants to secure more funding for their research has put out a blog post, it doesn’t make it true in any scientific sense.

        • kromem@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          human consciousness

          Wtf are you talking about? The article is about whether or not models can understand text. Not about whether they embody consciousness.

          Just because someone who wants to secure more funding for their research has put out a blog post, it doesn’t make it true in any scientific sense.

          Again, wtf are you going on about? Hinton was the only appeal to authority I made in comments here and I only referred to him quitting his job to whistleblow. And it’s not like he needs any attention to justify research if he wanted to.

          • Redacted@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            Understanding as most people know it implies some kind of consciousness or sentience as others have alluded to here.

            It’s the whole point of your post.

            • kromem@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              You are reading made up strawmen into the topic.

              The article defines the scope of the discussion straight up:

              The authors argue that as these models get bigger and are trained on more data, they improve on individual language-related abilities and also develop new ones by combining skills in a manner that hints at understanding — combinations that were unlikely to exist in the training data.

              The question is whether or not LLMs have a grasp of the training material such that they can produce new and novel concepts outside what was in the training data itself.

              Not whether the LLM is sentient or conscious - both characterizations I’d strongly dispute.

              Wikipedia has a useful distillation of the definition of understanding relevant to the above:

              process related to an abstract or physical object, such as a person, situation, or message whereby one is able to use concepts to model that object

              • Redacted@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                10 months ago

                No I’m not.

                You’re nearly there… The word “understanding” is the core premise of what the article claims to have found. If not for that, then the “research” doesn’t really amount to much.

                As has been mentioned, this then becomes a semantic/philosophical debate about what “understanding” actually means and a short Wikipedia or dictionary definition does not capture that discussion.

                • kromem@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  10 months ago

                  Ah, I see. AKA “Tell me you didn’t read the article and just read the headline without telling me.”

                  • Redacted@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    10 months ago

                    I’ve read the article and it’s just clickbait which offers no new insights.

                    What was of interest in it to yourself specifically?