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

TimeCapsuleLLM: LLM trained only on data from 1800-1875

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 334 posts

Re: TimeCapsuleLLM: LLM trained only on data from 1800-1875

#211

Post by djwide »

metalliqaz wrote: post #42
dogma1138 wrote: post #2

Would be interesting to train a cutting edge model with a cut off date of say 1900 and then prompt it about QM and relativity with some added context. If the model comes up with anything even remotely correct it would be quite a strong evidence that LLMs are a path to something bigger if not then I think it is time to go back to the drawing board.

Yann LeCun spoke explicitly on this idea recently and he asserts definitively that the LLM would not be able to add anything useful in that scenario. My understanding is that other AI researchers generally agree with him, and that it's mostly the hype beasts like Altman that think there is some "magic" in the weights that is actually intelligent. Their payday depends on it, so it is understandable. My opinion is that…

What do they (or you) have to say about the Lee Sedol AlphaGo move 78. It seems like that was "new knowledge." Are games just iterable and the real world idea space not? I am playing with these ideas a little.

Re: TimeCapsuleLLM: LLM trained only on data from 1800-1875

#212

Post by ddxv »

kopollo wrote: post #50
imjonse wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I suppose the vast majority of training data used for cutting edge models was created after 1900.

I don't know if this is related to the topic, but GPT5 can convert an 1880 Ottoman archival photograph to English, and without any loss of quality.

My friend works in that period of Ottoman archives. Do you have a source or something I can share?

Re: TimeCapsuleLLM: LLM trained only on data from 1800-1875

#213

Post by metalliqaz »

djwide wrote: post #211
metalliqaz wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yann LeCun spoke explicitly on this idea recently and he asserts definitively that the LLM would not be able to add anything useful in that scenario. My understanding is that other AI researchers generally agree with him, and that it's mostly the hype beasts like Altman that think there is some "magic" in the weights that is actually intelligent. Their payday depends on it, so it is understandable. My opinion is that…

What do they (or you) have to say about the Lee Sedol AlphaGo move 78. It seems like that was "new knowledge." Are games just iterable and the real world idea space not? I am playing with these ideas a little.

AlphaGo is not an LLM

Re: TimeCapsuleLLM: LLM trained only on data from 1800-1875

#214

Post by SecretDreams »

dogma1138 wrote: post #2

Would be interesting to train a cutting edge model with a cut off date of say 1900 and then prompt it about QM and relativity with some added context. If the model comes up with anything even remotely correct it would be quite a strong evidence that LLMs are a path to something bigger if not then I think it is time to go back to the drawing board.

I like this idea. I think I'd like it more if we didn't have to prompt the LLM in the first place. If it just had all of this information and decided to act upon it. That's what the great minds of history (and even average minds like myself) do. Just think about the facts in our point of view and spontaneously reason something greater out of them.

Re: TimeCapsuleLLM: LLM trained only on data from 1800-1875

#215

Post by mannykannot »

dogma1138 wrote: post #2

Would be interesting to train a cutting edge model with a cut off date of say 1900 and then prompt it about QM and relativity with some added context. If the model comes up with anything even remotely correct it would be quite a strong evidence that LLMs are a path to something bigger if not then I think it is time to go back to the drawing board.

That is a very interesting idea, though I would not dismiss LLMs as a dead end if they failed.

Re: TimeCapsuleLLM: LLM trained only on data from 1800-1875

#216

Post by twoodfin »

emodendroket wrote: post #126
scottlamb wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the bar here? Does anyone say "we don't know if Einstein could do this because we were really close or because he was really smart?" I by no means believe LLMs are general intelligence, and I've seen them produce a lot of garbage, but if they could produce these revolutionary theories from only <= year 1900 information and a prompt that is not ridiculously leading, that would be a really compelling demonstrati…

> Does anyone say "we don't know if Einstein could do this because we were really close or because he was really smart?" It turns out my reading is somewhat topical. I've been reading Rhodes' "The Making of the Atomic Bomb" and of the things he takes great pains to argue (I was not quite anticipating how much I'd be trying to recall my high school science classes to make sense of his account of various experiments) i…

It’s been a while since I read it, but I recall Rhodes’ point being that once the fundamentals of fission in heavy elements were validated, making a working bomb was no longer primarily a question of science, but one of engineering.

Re: TimeCapsuleLLM: LLM trained only on data from 1800-1875

#217

Post by mannykannot »

bazzargh wrote: post #31
dogma1138 wrote: post #2

Would be interesting to train a cutting edge model with a cut off date of say 1900 and then prompt it about QM and relativity with some added context. If the model comes up with anything even remotely correct it would be quite a strong evidence that LLMs are a path to something bigger if not then I think it is time to go back to the drawing board.

You would find things in there that were already close to QM and relativity. The Michelson-Morley experiment was 1887 and Lorentz transformations came along in 1889. The photoelectric effect (which Einstein explained in terms of photons in 1905) was also discovered in 1887. William Clifford (who _died_ in 1889) had notions that foreshadowed general relativity: "Riemann, and more specifically Clifford, conjectured tha…

If (as you seem to be suggesting) relativity was effectively lying there on the table waiting for Einstein to just pick it up, how come it blindsided most, if not quite all, of the greatest minds of his generation?

Re: TimeCapsuleLLM: LLM trained only on data from 1800-1875

#218

Post by Affric »

dogma1138 wrote: post #2

Would be interesting to train a cutting edge model with a cut off date of say 1900 and then prompt it about QM and relativity with some added context. If the model comes up with anything even remotely correct it would be quite a strong evidence that LLMs are a path to something bigger if not then I think it is time to go back to the drawing board.

Wow, an actual scientific experiment. Does anyone with expertise know if such things have been done?

Re: TimeCapsuleLLM: LLM trained only on data from 1800-1875

#219

Post by drdeca »

viccis wrote: post #183
strbean wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So, based on the source of "Trust me bro.", we'll decide this open question about new technology and the nature of cognition is solved. Seems unproductive.

In addition to what I have posted elsewhere in here, I would point to the fact that this is not indeed an "open question", as LLMs have not produced an entirely new and more advanced model of physics. So there is no reason to suppose they could have done so for QM.

What if making progress today is harder than it was then?

Re: TimeCapsuleLLM: LLM trained only on data from 1800-1875

#220

Post by Sophira »

I've felt for a while that having LLMs that could answer from a previous era would be amazing. I posted an open letter to OpenAI on Reddit about this: https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/zvm768/open_letter... .

I still think it's super important. Archive your current models - they'll be great in the future.

Post reply on HN