494
submitted 1 month ago by misk@sopuli.xyz to c/technology@lemmy.world
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] jabathekek@sopuli.xyz 206 points 1 month ago
[-] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 85 points 1 month ago

The results of this new GSM-Symbolic paper aren't completely new in the world of AI researchOther recent papers have similarly suggested that LLMs don't actually perform formal reasoning and instead mimic it with probabilistic pattern-matching of the closest similar data seen in their vast training sets.

WTF kind of reporting is this, though? None of this is recent or new at all, like in the slightest. I am shit at math, but have a high level understanding of statistical modeling concepts mostly as of a decade ago, and even I knew this. I recall a stats PHD describing models as "stochastic parrots"; nothing more than probabilistic mimicry. It was obviously no different the instant LLM's came on the scene. If only tech journalists bothered to do a superficial amount of research, instead of being spoon fed spin from tech bros with a profit motive...

[-] ObviouslyNotBanana@lemmy.world 45 points 1 month ago

It's written as if they literally expected AI to be self reasoning and not just a mirror of the bullshit that is put into it.

[-] Sterile_Technique@lemmy.world 39 points 1 month ago

Probably because that's the common expectation due to calling it "AI". We're well past the point of putting the lid back on that can of worms, but we really should have saved that label for... y'know... intelligence, that's artificial. People think we've made an early version of Halo's Cortana or Star Trek's Data, and not just a spellchecker on steroids.

The day we make actual AI is going to be a really confusing one for humanity.

[-] JDPoZ@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago

…a spellchecker on steroids.

Ask literally any of the LLM chat bots out there still using any headless GPT instances from 2023 how many Rs there are in “strawberry,” and enjoy. 🍓

[-] semperverus@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago

This problem is due to the fact that the AI isnt using english words internally, it's tokenizing. There are no Rs in {35006}.

load more comments (2 replies)
load more comments (14 replies)
[-] jabathekek@sopuli.xyz 12 points 1 month ago

describing models as “stochastic parrots”

That is SUCH a good description.

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] seaQueue@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago
[-] jabathekek@sopuli.xyz 12 points 1 month ago

*starts sweating

Look at that subtle pixel count, the tasteful colouring... oh my god, it's even transparent...

[-] Gradually_Adjusting@lemmy.world 94 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

One time I exposed deep cracks in my calculator's ability to write words with upside down numbers. I only ever managed to write BOOBS and hELLhOLE.

LLMs aren't reasoning. They can do some stuff okay, but they aren't thinking. Maybe if you had hundreds of them with unique training data all voting on proposals you could get something along the lines of a kind of recognition, but at that point you might as well just simulate cortical columns and try to do Jeff Hawkins' idea.

[-] noodlejetski@lemm.ee 45 points 1 month ago

LLMs aren't reasoning. They can do some stuff okay, but they aren't thinking

and the more people realize it, the better. which is why it's good that a research like that from a reputable company makes headlines.

load more comments (4 replies)
[-] anon_8675309@lemmy.world 90 points 1 month ago

Did anyone believe they had the ability to reason?

[-] LodeMike@lemmy.today 37 points 1 month ago
[-] Aeri@lemmy.world 30 points 1 month ago

People are stupid OK? I've had people who think that it can in fact do math, "better than a calculator"

[-] Furbag@lemmy.world 11 points 1 month ago

Like 90% of the consumers using this tech are totally fine handing over tasks that require reasoning to LLMs and not checking the answers for accuracy.

load more comments (13 replies)
[-] N0body@lemmy.dbzer0.com 56 points 1 month ago

The tested LLMs fared much worse, though, when the Apple researchers modified the GSM-Symbolic benchmark by adding "seemingly relevant but ultimately inconsequential statements" to the questions

Good thing they're being trained on random posts and comments on the internet, which are known for being succinct and accurate.

[-] blind3rdeye@lemm.ee 23 points 1 month ago

Yeah, especially given that so many popular vegetables are members of the brassica genus

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] CombatWombat1212@lemmy.ml 56 points 1 month ago

So do I every time I ask it a slightly complicated programming question

[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 19 points 1 month ago

And sometimes even really simple ones.

[-] werefreeatlast@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

How many w's in "Howard likes strawberries" It would be awesome to know!

[-] Saik0Shinigami@lemmy.saik0.com 9 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

So I keep seeing people reference this... And I found it curious of a concept that LLMs have problems with this. So I asked them... Several of them...

Outside of this image... Codestral ( my default ) got it actually correct and didn't talk itself out of being correct... But that's no fun so I asked 5 others, at once.

What's sad is that Dolphin Mixtral is a 26.44GB model...
Gemma 2 is the 5.44GB variant
Gemma 2B is the 1.63GB variant
LLaVa Llama3 is the 5.55 GB variant
Mistral is the 4.11GB Variant

So I asked Codestral again because why not! And this time it talked itself out of being correct...

Edit: fixed newline formatting.

load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
[-] emerald@lemmy.blahaj.zone 46 points 1 month ago

statistical engine suggesting words that sound like they'd probably be correct is bad at reasoning

How can this be??

[-] Siegfried@lemmy.world 19 points 1 month ago

I would say that if anything, LLMs are showing cracks in our way of reasoning.

[-] MoogleMaestro@lemmy.zip 13 points 1 month ago

Or the problem with tech billionaires selling "magic solutions" to problems that don't actually exist. Or how people are too gullible in the modern internet to understand when they're being sold snake oil in the form of "technological advancement" when it's actually just repackaged plagiarized material.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] graphene@lemm.ee 7 points 1 month ago
[-] aesthelete@lemmy.world 8 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)
load more comments (1 replies)
[-] Halcyon@discuss.tchncs.de 45 points 1 month ago

They are large LANGUAGE models. It's no surprise that they can't solve those mathematical problems in the study. They are trained for text production. We already knew that they were no good in counting things.

[-] Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee 26 points 1 month ago

"You see this fish? Well, it SUCKS at climbing trees."

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] CosmoNova@lemmy.world 39 points 1 month ago

Are you telling me Apple hasn't seen through the grift and is approaching this with an open mind just to learn how full off bullshit most of the claims from the likes of Altman are? And now they're sharing their gruesome discoveries with everyone while they're unveiling them?

[-] WhatAmLemmy@lemmy.world 51 points 1 month ago

I would argue that Apple Intelligence™️ is evidence they never bought the grift. It's very focused on tailored models scoped to the specific tasks that AI does well; creative and non-critical tasks like assisting with text processing/transforming, image generation, photo manipulation.

The Siri integrations seem more like they're using the LLM to stitch together the API's that were already exposed between apps (used by shortcuts, etc); each having internal logic and validation that's entirely programmed (and documented) by humans. They market it as a whole lot more, but they market every new product as some significant milestone for mankind ... even when it's a feature that other phones have had for years, but in an iPhone!

load more comments (3 replies)
[-] lvxferre@mander.xyz 36 points 1 month ago

The fun part isn't even what Apple said - that the emperor is naked - but why it's doing it. It's nice bullet against all four of its GAFAM competitors.

[-] jherazob@fedia.io 28 points 1 month ago

This right here, this isn't conscientious analysis of tech and intellectual honesty or whatever, it's a calculated shot at it's competitors who are desperately trying to prevent the generative AI market house of cards from falling

[-] conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works 18 points 1 month ago

They're a publicly traded company.

Their executives need something to point to to be able to push back against pressure to jump on the trend.

[-] nutsack@lemmy.world 33 points 1 month ago

cracks? it doesn't even exist. we figured this out a long time ago.

[-] KingThrillgore@lemmy.ml 27 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

I feel like a draft landed on Tim's desk a few weeks ago, explains why they suddenly pulled back on OpenAI funding.

People on the removed superfund birdsite are already saying Apple is missing out on the next revolution.

[-] BreadstickNinja@lemmy.world 16 points 1 month ago

"Superfund birdsite" I am shamelessly going to steal from you

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] RaoulDook@lemmy.world 20 points 1 month ago

I hope this gets circulated enough to reduce the ridiculous amount of investment and energy waste that the ramping-up of "AI" services has brought. All the companies have just gone way too far off the deep end with this shit that most people don't even want.

[-] thanks_shakey_snake@lemmy.ca 18 points 1 month ago

People working with these technologies have known this for quite awhile. It's nice of Apple's researchers to formalize it, but nobody is really surprised-- Least of all the companies funnelling traincars of money into the LLM furnace.

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] whotookkarl@lemmy.world 17 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Here's the cycle we've gone through multiple times and are currently in:

AI winter (low research funding) -> incremental scientific advancement -> breakthrough for new capabilities from multiple incremental advancements to the scientific models over time building on each other (expert systems, LLMs, neutral networks, etc) -> engineering creates new tech products/frameworks/services based on new science -> hype for new tech creates sales and economic activity, research funding, subsidies etc -> (for LLMs we're here) people become familiar with new tech capabilities and limitations through use -> hype spending bubble bursts when overspend doesn't keep up with infinite money line goes up or new research breakthroughs -> AI winter -> etc...

[-] sircac@lemmy.world 15 points 1 month ago

They predict, not reason....

[-] WrenFeathers@lemmy.world 9 points 1 month ago

Someone needs to pull the plug on all of that stuff.

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 15 Oct 2024
494 points (96.4% liked)

Technology

59454 readers
1925 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS