Similar arguments to LeCun. People are going to keep saying this about autoregressive models, how small errors accumulate and can't be corrected, while we literally watch reasoning models say things like "oh that's not right, let me try a different approach". To me, this is like people saying "well NAND gates clearly can't sort things so I don't see how a computer could". Large transformers can clearly learn very com…
Some thoughts on autoregressive models
21–30 of 60 posts
Re: Some thoughts on autoregressive models
#22> The context window can be compared to working memory in humans: it’s fast, efficient but gets rapidly overloaded. Humans manage this limitation by offloading previously learned information into other memory forms, whereas LLMs can only mimic this process superficially at best. This is just silly. Humans forget things all the time! If I want to remember something I write it down. > The nature of hallucination is ver…
Do you think in words when you do a 3 x 2 digit multiplication? I do it all in images and I think many other people do too.
I wonder if anyone has tried getting them to "imagine" math in a way to "visually compute".
Re: Some thoughts on autoregressive models
#23Similar arguments to LeCun. People are going to keep saying this about autoregressive models, how small errors accumulate and can't be corrected, while we literally watch reasoning models say things like "oh that's not right, let me try a different approach". To me, this is like people saying "well NAND gates clearly can't sort things so I don't see how a computer could". Large transformers can clearly learn very com…
Yann LeCun's prediction was empirically refuted. He says that the longer LLMs run, the less accurate they get. OpenAI showed the opposite is true.
Re: Some thoughts on autoregressive models
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yann LeCun's prediction was empirically refuted. He says that the longer LLMs run, the less accurate they get. OpenAI showed the opposite is true.
They didn't show this, they just increased the length where accuracy breaks down.
Re: Some thoughts on autoregressive models
#25Re: Some thoughts on autoregressive models
#26> The context window can be compared to working memory in humans: it’s fast, efficient but gets rapidly overloaded. Humans manage this limitation by offloading previously learned information into other memory forms, whereas LLMs can only mimic this process superficially at best. This is just silly. Humans forget things all the time! If I want to remember something I write it down. > The nature of hallucination is ver…
The article wasn't supposed to be informative for people who already know how LLMs work. Like the title said, just wanted to write down some thoughts.
> This is just silly. Humans forget things all the time! If I want to remember something I write it down.
The opposite was never stated. Human memory is of course selective.
> Here is an interesting experiment I use to help people understand next token prediction. Think of a simple math problem in your head, maybe 3 digit by 2 digit multiplication. Then speak out every single thought you have while solving it.
Now a point I'm happy to discuss! The process of solving it is actually quite autoregressive-like, but this is also an example of a common pitfall with LLMs: they purely rely on pattern matching because they don't have the internal representation of what they really deal with (algebra). But we all know that.
The main question is whether LLMs taught to reason actually show that they have this kind of representation. They still work very differently I'd say; even for tasks that seem trivial to humans, reasoning LLMs will make a lot of mistakes before arriving at a plausible-sounding result. Because it was trained to reason, there's a higher chance now that the plausible-sounding result is actually correct. But this property is actually quite interesting once applied to complex tasks that would take too much time and overwhelming for humans, and that's where they shine as powerful tools.
Re: Some thoughts on autoregressive models
#27>Isn’t language by itself linear. We've known that language is hierarchal, not linear for hundreds of years at this point.
Re: Some thoughts on autoregressive models
#28>Most generative AI models nowadays are autoregressive. There are also diffusion based models which don't rely on next token prediction.
Re: Some thoughts on autoregressive models
#29Similar arguments to LeCun. People are going to keep saying this about autoregressive models, how small errors accumulate and can't be corrected, while we literally watch reasoning models say things like "oh that's not right, let me try a different approach". To me, this is like people saying "well NAND gates clearly can't sort things so I don't see how a computer could". Large transformers can clearly learn very com…
I-JEPA and V-JEPA have recently shown promising results as well.
Re: Some thoughts on autoregressive models
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
Author here and I welcome the feedback, but I don't really understand your point. My post is clearly not dismissive of efforts to make LLMs reason using CoT prompting techniques and post-training, and I think such efforts are even mentioned. The model remains autoregressive either way, and this reasoning is not some kind of magic that makes them behave differently - these improvements only make them perform (much) be…
Not saying that our current approaches will lead to intelligence. No one can know. It could very well be that the internal mechanism of our thought has an auto-regressive reasoning component. With the full system effectively "combining" short term memory (what just happened) and "pruned" long-term memory (what relevant things i know from the past) and pushing that into a RAW autoregressive reasoning component. It is…
I also mentioned that I'm supportive of architectures that will integrate autoregressive components. Totally agree with that.