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

41–50 of 95 posts

Re: Natural language instructions induce generalization in networks of neurons

#41

Post by famouswaffles »

lo_zamoyski wrote: post #34
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…

Why assume this is sensible? Aerodynamics can help discover general principles that apply to both birds and planes or whatever else. I don't see how this holds for LLMs and brains. The similarity between LLMs and brains is superficial. Besides, with human beings, we have a host of philosophical problems that undermine the neuroscientific presumption that a mechanistic and closed view of the brain can account for ment…

>I don't see how this holds for LLMs and brains. The similarity between LLMs and brains is superficial.

It's really not any more superficial than planes and bird flight.

Re: Natural language instructions induce generalization in networks of neurons

#43

Post by Jensson »

lo_zamoyski wrote: post #29
a_gnostic wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

But that would be an impossibility if understanding requires expressing it in language.

Re: Natural language instructions induce generalization in networks of neurons

#44

Post by a_gnostic »

vaidhy wrote: post #32
a_gnostic wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Thoughts occur independent of language is same as saying sentient beings think. The question is does the thought you have depend on the language? I speak tamil and english and can distinctly see how the language drives some of my understanding. If you have a language that has evolved to describe 3D space, would be understand spatial ideas better/faster? If we are pattern matching creatures, then the patterns are buil…

I grew up trilingual, and have noticed that I understand mechanical concepts better in one language, industrial concepts in another… but have mostly defaulted to English nowadays. I find learning new concepts easier by playing translation games; Which language is the root for this word, and how does it mechanically relate to the concept?

Re: Natural language instructions induce generalization in networks of neurons

#45

Post by robwwilliams »

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…

Yes, the word “represented” is too widely used and abused in neuroscience—to the point where a frog has “fly detector” neurons. Humberto Maturana pushed back against this pervasive idea. Chapter 4 of Terry Winograd’s and Francesco Valera’s Understanding Computers and Cognition has a good overview of common presumptions.

Given that CNS is a 700 million year hack, there will be lots of odd tricks used to generate effective behaviors.

Re: Natural language instructions induce generalization in networks of neurons

#46

Post by Jensson »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #39
smokel wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hm, no. To start, cells are able to replicate themselves, whereas most silicon used today is not even close to doing so. The story you suggest seems to be built on a limited understanding of the processes involved. It's pretty hard to predict the future, especially given incorrect assumptions.

Compute is substrate independent. We use transistors because they are wicked fast and efficient. But a 4090 built from metal balls and wood blocks would still be able to perform all the same calculations. Or a 4090 made by drawing X's and O's on a (really massive) piece of paper. Or one made by connecting a bunch of neurons together for that matter. Saying cells can multiply doesn't really mean anything, unless is gi…

Analogue computers aren't equivalent to Turing machines.

Re: Natural language instructions induce generalization in networks of neurons

#47

Post by robwwilliams »

canjobear wrote: post #30
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.

Not either-or. It is both. Spike rate variation is way too slow for some types of low level compute. Spike timing us critical for actions as “simple” as throwing a fast ball into the strike zone.

Re: Natural language instructions induce generalization in networks of neurons

#48

Post by noiv »

lo_zamoyski wrote: post #28
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…

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.

I consider a sentence as a formatted thought. That implies a thought exists before it is expressed in words. There's a ton of thoughts in my head which can't be transformed into any language I speak. I wish I could somehow acquire some proficiency in the other thousands of languages spoken by humans on this planet, just to proof their immense lack of features.

Also our natural languages restrict information bandwidth to a few bytes per second. Imagine doing sports like tennis, chess or soccer at this speed...

Re: Natural language instructions induce generalization in networks of neurons

#49

Post by robwwilliams »

nothis wrote: post #7
kevindamm wrote: post #2

It's as if language is itself the latent space for these psychophysical tasks, especially compositional instruction. Their description of it as a scaffolding also seems apt.

I'm not pretending to understand half the words uttered in this discussion but I'm constantly reminded of how much it helps me to articulate things (explain them to others, write them down, etc) to understand them. Maybe that thinking indeed happens almost entirely on a linguistic level and I'm not doing half as much other thinking (visualization, abstract logic, etc.) in the process as I thought. That feels weird.

Or is the real thinking sub-linguistic and “you” and those you talk to are the target audience of language? Sentences emerge from a pre-linguistic space we do not understand.

Re: Natural language instructions induce generalization in networks of neurons

#50

Post by nerdponx »

zer00eyz wrote: post #3
kevindamm wrote: post #2

It's as if language is itself the latent space for these psychophysical tasks, especially compositional instruction. Their description of it as a scaffolding also seems apt.

I hate the reductive nature of the concept of "latent spaces". A good enough formula for a task isn't a solution for every task. Yes Newtonian mechanics work, but Einstein is a better reflection of reality.

The entire innovation (discovery?) of LLMs is that a good formula for the task of sequence completion turns out to also be a good formula for a wide range of AI tasks. That emergent property is why language models are called language models.
Post reply on HN