Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Artificial intelligence systems found to excel at imitation, but not innovation

techxplore.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 126 posts

Re: Artificial intelligence systems found to excel at imitation, but not innovation

#41

Post by Qem »

b33j0r wrote: post #28
troelsSteegin wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

... and our judgments of composition favor recall over precision. Which is to say that as human judges we're good at finding sense in something generated if it's plausible. We'll take a proposition (eg in a composition) and construct a justification for it. "I can see how that makes sense". I am conflating plausible combination with high recall. Precision, in this sense, is that no proposition would be acceptable wit…

The very first python app I wrote was a statistical bard generator. I had python calculate word frequencies from a Shakespeare corpus and spit them back out with a probability distribution. Honestly it read just as well ;) We’re simpler than we imagine.

> We’re simpler than we imagine.

Indeed, creativity (not just randomness) is a quite high bar, that I think even most humans don't pass. Most of us don't create a lot of new things and ideas in our daily lives. We mostly follow the steps of those that came before them, with small adjustments here and there.

Re: Artificial intelligence systems found to excel at imitation, but not innovation

#42

Post by baz00 »

anthk wrote: post #6
i8comments wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AI systems are not like people.

People collectively can act like systems.

No they don't. They create systems and act within in them. Subtle but important difference.

Re: Artificial intelligence systems found to excel at imitation, but not innovation

#43

Post by danhodgins »

thanatos519 wrote: post #33
anentropic wrote: post #11

> Artificial intelligence systems found to Excel at imitation, but not innovation And they do it using the Microsoft spreadsheet software?

No, they use Excel, the Canadian chewing gum.

Excel-erate your breath... or spreadsheet

Re: Artificial intelligence systems found to excel at imitation, but not innovation

#44

Post by hackinthebochs »

gibsonf1 wrote: post #29

How could a statistical system trained on data display intelligence let alone innovation? It's just very good statistics at the end of the day. Artificial Perception is about as far as you can get with ml/dl tech if you point the sensors at the world of space-time. If you point it at words, as with LLM, you get statistics about words - that is, no actual understanding of what the words model in the minds of the origi…

LLMs aren't statistical systems in any substantive sense. They are deterministic programs over the input sequence. They capture statistical relationships about words, but so do human minds. That they are sensitive to statistical relationships does not discount their ability to understand.

Re: Artificial intelligence systems found to excel at imitation, but not innovation

#45

Post by Tostino »

gibsonf1 wrote: post #29

How could a statistical system trained on data display intelligence let alone innovation? It's just very good statistics at the end of the day. Artificial Perception is about as far as you can get with ml/dl tech if you point the sensors at the world of space-time. If you point it at words, as with LLM, you get statistics about words - that is, no actual understanding of what the words model in the minds of the origi…

As a counter point, I cannot be sure that the words you are speaking mean the same thing to you in your mind as they do to me when I hear you.

Re: Artificial intelligence systems found to excel at imitation, but not innovation

#46

Post by k__ »

HKH2 wrote: post #22
k__ wrote: post #15

Even their imitation is just superficial, at least for the prompts the average user is motivated to write. I might not be able to differentiate AI content from any human content, but I can differentiate it from high quality human content. Which is a bit sad, since AI will probably eliminate most lower end content creation jobs. This doesn't improve the state of the content industry for users, but saves companies quit…

> AI will probably eliminate most lower end content creation jobs. This doesn't improve the state of the content industry for users, but saves companies quite some money. What does it say if your work can't be distinguished from AI clichés? Maybe it's what the industry needs.

Interesting perspective.

Thanks

Re: Artificial intelligence systems found to excel at imitation, but not innovation

#47

Post by corethree »

vemv wrote: post #12

One can casually observe that LLMs quite excel at composition though: gluing together pieces of knowledge in ways no one did before (examples: a program that does X using language Y, a painting that mashes up two themes). Most knowledge workers' activities aren't innovative or imitational - similarly, we compose stuff, so LLMs are a fair competitor.

All innovation is composition plus random generation. Which LLMs already do.

LLMs have a rudimentary form of innovation. It's not quite as good as humans but it's getting there.

Re: Artificial intelligence systems found to excel at imitation, but not innovation

#48

Post by corethree »

Got a question for people who know this stuff well.

Let's say I have a generic feed forward network the size of chatGPT and structurally interconnected in the same way.

Does there exist a set of weights for that network that will essentially represent the LLM that doesn't hallucinate and is similar to the perfect ai assistant we are all currently striving towards?

My question is, that is it essentially a training problem?

Re: Artificial intelligence systems found to excel at imitation, but not innovation

#49

Post by corethree »

mrangle wrote: post #32

Arguably the human-ness (or even animal-ness) of thought is, at its root, characterized as the ability abstract in a novel manner (the neurocog term for innovate). In other words, it is the ability to find patterns between two concepts that weren't, ever, prior announced. A computer that could do this would then be AI. A computer that cannot would fall short of that category, however otherwise dazzling in stitching t…

LLMs can do this already. They are well past this. It's just they can't do it as well as humans and they can hallucinate as well.

The problems we are having with LLMs aren't the fact that they aren't creative. It's the fact that they are too creative. They make up too much stuff that isn't true.

Re: Artificial intelligence systems found to excel at imitation, but not innovation

#50

Post by anon291 »

> In one task, for example, participants were asked how they could draw a circle without using a typical tool such as a compass.

This is a completely useless question. LLMs are trained only on language. Humans are trained both on language and on physical activities. The LLM has no conception of 'drawing'. It cannot draw. Its inputs and outputs are tokens. Humans can draw. A better question would be to ask it to compose stories... something it's trained on.

In particular, it would seem to me that a multimodal model trained on both action, sensory information, and language, would be better able to innovate in this regard. How could ChatGPT have any true understanding of spatial responses... it's never moved anything in its existence.

Post reply on HN