Live data from Hacker News

ARC Prize – a $1M+ competition towards open AGI progress

arcprize.org

141–150 of 351 posts

Re: ARC Prize – a $1M+ competition towards open AGI progress

#141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I just did the first 5 of the "public eval set" without having looked at the "public training set", and found them easy enough. If we're defining AGI as at least human level, then the AGI should also be able to do these without seeing any more examples. I don't think there's any rules about what knowledge/experience you build into your solution.

AGI should obviously be able to do them. But AI being able to do those 100 percent wouldn't be evidence of AGI however. It is a very narrow domain.

Why not? If the only thing that can solve problem X is AGI (e.g. humans), and something else comes along that solves it, then rationally that should be evidence that the something else is AGI right?

Unless you have strong prior beliefs (like "computers can't be AGI") or something else that's problem specific ("these problems can be solved by these techniques which don't count as AGI"). So I guess that's my real question.

Re: ARC Prize – a $1M+ competition towards open AGI progress

#142
post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Here is a challenge, designed to be unsolvable or so. We'll give you a bazillion dollars if you complete the challenge, and, in the meantime, we will use your attempts to train an as AI that will be worth the cost!!"

Did you even try the puzzles? They’re not particularly “unsolvable”.

ARC-AGI: "here are some pretty simple puzzles, we'll give you a million dollars to solve them!"

Human: "They're quite challenging, this might be a trick to engage activity for the purpose of training models."

skrebbel: "You're stupid".

Re: ARC Prize – a $1M+ competition towards open AGI progress

#144
post #21

This is super cool. I share Francois' intuition that the presently data-hungry learning paradigm is not only not generalizable but unsustainable: humans do not need 10,000 examples to tell the difference between cats and dogs, and the main reason computers can today is because we have millions of examples. As a result, it may be hard to transfer knowledge to more esoteric domains where data is expensive, rare, and ha…

> humans do not need 10,000 examples to tell the difference between cats and dogs The optimization process that trained the human brain is called evolution, and it took a lot more than 10,000 examples to produce a system that can differentiate cats vs dogs. Put differently, an LLM is pre-trained with very light priors, starting almost from scratch, whereas a human brain is pre-loaded with extremely strong priors.

[deleted]

Re: ARC Prize – a $1M+ competition towards open AGI progress

#145
post #21

This is super cool. I share Francois' intuition that the presently data-hungry learning paradigm is not only not generalizable but unsustainable: humans do not need 10,000 examples to tell the difference between cats and dogs, and the main reason computers can today is because we have millions of examples. As a result, it may be hard to transfer knowledge to more esoteric domains where data is expensive, rare, and ha…

> humans do not need 10,000 examples to tell the difference between cats and dogs

Humans learn through a lifetime.

Or are we talking about newborn infants?

Re: ARC Prize – a $1M+ competition towards open AGI progress

#146
post #140
post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Here is a challenge, designed to be unsolvable or so. We'll give you a bazillion dollars if you complete the challenge, and, in the meantime, we will use your attempts to train an as AI that will be worth the cost!!"

No, you missed the point. The striking thing about ARC is the puzzles are super easy, for humans. The average person solves 85% of the tasks, but the worlds best LLMs are only solving 5%. The challenge is to simply make an AI score as well as the average human.

[flagged]

Re: ARC Prize – a $1M+ competition towards open AGI progress

#148
Chollet's argument is that LLMs just imitate and recombine patterns. This might be true if you're looking at LLMs in isolation, but when they chat with people something different happens. The system made of humans+LLMs is an AGI. It is no longer just a parrot, it ingests new information, gets guidance, feedback and is basically embodied in a chat room with human and tools.

This scales for 200M users and 1 billion sessions per moth for OpenAI, which can interpret every human response as a feedback signal, implicit or explicit. Even more if you take multiple sessions of chat spreading over days, that continue the same topic and incorporate real world feedback. The scale of interaction is just staggering, the LLM can incorporate this experience to iteratively improve.

If you take a look at humans, we're very incapable alone. Think feral Einstein on a remote island - what could he achieve without the social context and language based learning? Just as a human brain is severely limited without society, LLMs also need society, diversity of agents and experiences, and sharing of those experiences in language.

It is unfair to compare a human immersed in society with a standalone model. That is why they appear limited. But even as a system of memorization+recombination they can be a powerful element of the AGI. I think AGI will be social and distributed, won't be a singleton. Its evolution is based on learning from the world, no longer just a parrot of human text. The data engine would be: World People LLM, a full feedback cycle, all three components evolve in time. Intelligence evolves socially.

Re: ARC Prize – a $1M+ competition towards open AGI progress

#149
post #53
post #21

This is super cool. I share Francois' intuition that the presently data-hungry learning paradigm is not only not generalizable but unsustainable: humans do not need 10,000 examples to tell the difference between cats and dogs, and the main reason computers can today is because we have millions of examples. As a result, it may be hard to transfer knowledge to more esoteric domains where data is expensive, rare, and ha…

> humans do not need 10,000 examples to tell the difference between cats and dogs, I swear, not enough people have kids. Now, is it 10k examples? No, but I think it was on the order of hundreds, if not thousands. One thing kids do is they'll ask for confirmation of their guess. You'll be reading a book you've read 50 times before and the kid will stop you, point at a dog in the book, and ask "dog?" And there is a dev…

I think your comment over intellectualises the way children experience the world.

My child experiences the world in a really pure way. They don’t care much about labels or colours or any other human inventions like that. He picks up his carrot, he doesn’t care about the name or the color . He just enjoys it through purely experiencing eating it. He can also find incredible flow state like joy from playing with river stones or looking at the moon.

I personally feel bad I have to each them to label things and but things in boxes. I think your child is frustrated at times because it’s a punish of a game. The departure from “the oceanic feeling.

Your comment would make sense to me if the end game of our brains and human experience is labelling things. It’s not. It’s useful but it’s not what living is about.

Re: ARC Prize – a $1M+ competition towards open AGI progress

#150
post #146
post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, you missed the point. The striking thing about ARC is the puzzles are super easy, for humans. The average person solves 85% of the tasks, but the worlds best LLMs are only solving 5%. The challenge is to simply make an AI score as well as the average human.

[flagged]

Amazon Mechanical Turk workers, who might not be 100 average IQ but wouldn't be far off that.
Post reply on HN