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

Natural language instructions induce generalization in networks of neurons

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 95 posts

Re: Natural language instructions induce generalization in networks of neurons

#21

Post by smokel »

worstspotgain wrote: post #15

Birds inspired planes. Later, aerodynamics fed back into ornithology. I've been waiting for LLMs to be evaluated as a model of human thought. Complexity and scale have held neuroscience back. It's nowhere close to building a high-level brain model up from biological primitives. Like ornithology, it could use some feedback. All arguments about AGI aside, a machine was built that writes like a human. Its design is very…

> Later, aerodynamics fed back into ornithology.

You mean to imply that birds have learned from jet fighter designs?

I fail to understand the point you're making.

Re: Natural language instructions induce generalization in networks of neurons

#22

Post by a_gnostic »

jameshart wrote: post #14
sisyphus_coding wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> comeback Did it fall out of favour?

Strong Sapir-Whorf (linguistic determinism - language constrains thought) became pretty much seen as a joke by the 1980s. Linguistic relativism (weak Sapir-Whorf - language shapes thought) is still respectable (because, I mean, of course it does). Actually, this research might just as well be evidence for linguistic universalism (Chomsky - language enables thought). In general linguistic philosophers have been coming…

Oftentimes I find myself understanding complex concepts before I can describe them, even internally. I am sure everyone has this, as I often read comments praising others' submissions for formulating their thoughts efficiently. So thoughts occur independent of language, but need it to be expressed and shared, even if through pictures and sounds.

Re: Natural language instructions induce generalization in networks of neurons

#23

Post by [deleted] »

smokel wrote: post #21
worstspotgain wrote: post #15

Birds inspired planes. Later, aerodynamics fed back into ornithology. I've been waiting for LLMs to be evaluated as a model of human thought. Complexity and scale have held neuroscience back. It's nowhere close to building a high-level brain model up from biological primitives. Like ornithology, it could use some feedback. All arguments about AGI aside, a machine was built that writes like a human. Its design is very…

> Later, aerodynamics fed back into ornithology. You mean to imply that birds have learned from jet fighter designs? I fail to understand the point you're making.

[deleted]

Re: Natural language instructions induce generalization in networks of neurons

#25

Post by worstspotgain »

smokel wrote: post #21
worstspotgain wrote: post #15

Birds inspired planes. Later, aerodynamics fed back into ornithology. I've been waiting for LLMs to be evaluated as a model of human thought. Complexity and scale have held neuroscience back. It's nowhere close to building a high-level brain model up from biological primitives. Like ornithology, it could use some feedback. All arguments about AGI aside, a machine was built that writes like a human. Its design is very…

> Later, aerodynamics fed back into ornithology. You mean to imply that birds have learned from jet fighter designs? I fail to understand the point you're making.

Concepts from the mechanics of flight (e.g. lift and drag) have helped ornithologists understand birds better. Birds themselves did not learn much.

Re: Natural language instructions induce generalization in networks of neurons

#26

Post by vaidhy »

smokel wrote: post #21
worstspotgain wrote: post #15

Birds inspired planes. Later, aerodynamics fed back into ornithology. I've been waiting for LLMs to be evaluated as a model of human thought. Complexity and scale have held neuroscience back. It's nowhere close to building a high-level brain model up from biological primitives. Like ornithology, it could use some feedback. All arguments about AGI aside, a machine was built that writes like a human. Its design is very…

> Later, aerodynamics fed back into ornithology. You mean to imply that birds have learned from jet fighter designs? I fail to understand the point you're making.

I believe the point is that we understand the birds' flight better applying the principles we learnt designing and flying airplanes. Similarly, we can learn more about human brain by applying things we learn from building the ANN back to the study of humans (anthropology in general, maybe neuroscience and psychology )

Re: Natural language instructions induce generalization in networks of neurons

#27

Post by Sardtok »

smokel wrote: post #21
worstspotgain wrote: post #15

Birds inspired planes. Later, aerodynamics fed back into ornithology. I've been waiting for LLMs to be evaluated as a model of human thought. Complexity and scale have held neuroscience back. It's nowhere close to building a high-level brain model up from biological primitives. Like ornithology, it could use some feedback. All arguments about AGI aside, a machine was built that writes like a human. Its design is very…

> Later, aerodynamics fed back into ornithology. You mean to imply that birds have learned from jet fighter designs? I fail to understand the point you're making.

He didn't say it fed back into birds, but into the study of birds.

Re: Natural language instructions induce generalization in networks of neurons

#28

Post by lo_zamoyski »

jameshart wrote: post #14
sisyphus_coding wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> comeback Did it fall out of favour?

Strong Sapir-Whorf (linguistic determinism - language constrains thought) became pretty much seen as a joke by the 1980s. Linguistic relativism (weak Sapir-Whorf - language shapes thought) is still respectable (because, I mean, of course it does). Actually, this research might just as well be evidence for linguistic universalism (Chomsky - language enables thought). In general linguistic philosophers have been coming…

The distinction between language and "thought" to me is odd. Language and "thought" are the same thing. The mouth sounds or hand scribbles aren't the language, but expressions of it.

Re: Natural language instructions induce generalization in networks of neurons

#29

Post by lo_zamoyski »

a_gnostic wrote: post #22
jameshart wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Strong Sapir-Whorf (linguistic determinism - language constrains thought) became pretty much seen as a joke by the 1980s. Linguistic relativism (weak Sapir-Whorf - language shapes thought) is still respectable (because, I mean, of course it does). Actually, this research might just as well be evidence for linguistic universalism (Chomsky - language enables thought). In general linguistic philosophers have been coming…

Oftentimes I find myself understanding complex concepts before I can describe them, even internally . I am sure everyone has this, as I often read comments praising others' submissions for formulating their thoughts efficiently. So thoughts occur independent of language, but need it to be expressed and shared, even if through pictures and sounds.

Expression is not language. What you're having trouble doing is expressing what you understand.

Re: Natural language instructions induce generalization in networks of neurons

#30

Post by canjobear »

nyrikki wrote: post #6

>Tasks that are instructed using conditional clauses also require a simple form of deductive reasoning (if p then q else s) > Our models ofer several experimentally testable predictions outlining how linguistic information must be represented to facilitate flexible and general cognition in the human brain. Aren't those claims falsified by more recent studies that show that even in flys, preferred direction to a movin…

There’s a long debate in neuroscience about whether information is encoded in timing of individual spikes or only their rates (where rate coding is a bit more similar to how ANNs work, but still different). It hasn’t been decided by any one paper, nor is it likely to be: it seems that different populations of neurons in different parts of the brain encode information through different means.
Post reply on HN