What guarantee exists to make sure that the intelligence developed has an inclination towards good?
ARC Prize – a $1M+ competition towards open AGI progress
251–260 of 351 posts
Re: ARC Prize – a $1M+ competition towards open AGI progress
#252Back in the day me and a couple of friends got very excited to chase the prize in Netflix's contest [1]. Took us a minute to realize it was a brilliant move on the company's part -- all they had to do was dangle a carrot, and they had teams of PhDs and budding data scientists hacking away endless hours in hope to win. A real bargain, had they tried to hire with that budget, they would've maybe got a handful of people for a year.
1: https://www.crn.com/news/applications-os/220100498/researche...
Re: ARC Prize – a $1M+ competition towards open AGI progress
#253While I agree with the spirit of the competition, a $1M prize seems a little too low considering tens of billions of dollars have already been invested in the race to AGI, and we will see many times that put into the space in the coming years. The impact of AGI will be measured in trillions at minimum. So what you are ultimately rewarding isn't AGI research but fine tuning the newest public LLM release to best meet t…
Yeah, in 2006 Netflix offered $1M in a similar scheme. At least back then that sum meant something.
Re: ARC Prize – a $1M+ competition towards open AGI progress
#254Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Now, is it 10k examples? No, but I think it was on the order of hundreds, if not thousands. I have kids so I'm presuming I'm allowed to have an opinion here. This is ignoring the fact that babies are not just learning labels, they're learning the whole of language, motion planning, sensory processing, etc. Once they have the basics down concept acquisition time shrinks rapidly and kids can easily learn their new fa…
> How many homework questions did your entire calc 1 class have? I'm guessing less than 100 and (hopefully) you successfully learned differential calculus. Not just that: people learn mathematics mainly by _thinking over and solving problems_, not by memorising solutions to problems. During my mathematics education I had to practice solving a lot of problems dissimilar what I had seen before. Even in the theory part,…
Every time I see people online reduce the human thinking process to just production of a perceptible output, I start questioning myself, whether somehow I am the only human on this planet capable of thinking and everyone else is just pretending. That can't be right. It doesn't add up.
The answer is that both humans and the model are capable of reasoning, but the model is more restricted in the reasoning that it can perform since it must conform to the dataset. This means the model is not allowed to invest tokens that do not immediately represent an answer but have to be derived on the way to the answer. Since these thinking tokens are not part of the dataset, the reasoning that the LLM can perform is constrained to the parts of the model that are not subject to the straight jacket of training loss. Therefore most of the reasoning occurs in-between the first and last layers and ends with the last layer, at which point the produced token must cross the training loss barrier. Tokens that invest into the future but are not in the dataset get rejected and thereby limit the ability of the LLM to reason.
Re: ARC Prize – a $1M+ competition towards open AGI progress
#255Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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. Asserted without evidence. We have essentially no idea at what point living systems were capable of differentiating cats from dogs (we don't even know for sure which living systems can do this).
We know for a fact that cats, dogs, and humans do.
Sure, but can earthworms? Butterflies? Oak trees? Slime mould? At what point in the history of life did sufficient discrimination to differentiate e.g. a cat and a dog actually arise? Are the mechanisms used for this universal? Are some better than others? etc.
Re: ARC Prize – a $1M+ competition towards open AGI progress
#256[deleted]
Re: ARC Prize – a $1M+ competition towards open AGI progress
#257Earlier quoted context omitted.
Spatial reasoning is easily isomorphic to many kinds of reasoning - just not all of them. Spatial reasoning in this case also limits the AI to 2 dimensions. I concede that with more dimensions, there will be more isomorphisms. Is there a number of dimensions that captures all reasoning? I don't know..
Claims of isomorphisms are really strong claims to not be backed up with some kind of evidence.
I think the reasoning is very simple. Everything that happens happens in space through time. Intelligent systems must solve problems where they observe what's happening in space over some amount of time, and then predict whats going to happen to space over some other amount of time.
Re: ARC Prize – a $1M+ competition towards open AGI progress
#258This 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
Neither do machines. Lookup few-shot learning with things like CLIP.
Re: ARC Prize – a $1M+ competition towards open AGI progress
#259So, this is a good idea. Having opinions about what AGI benchmarks should look like is a great way to argue about the kind of technology we want to build for the future. However, why are the 100 test tasks secret? I don't understand why how resisting “memorization” techniques requires it. Maybe someone can enlighten me.
Test date is always a secret no, otherwise you can train it on the test data and prod your algo to match the results closely as possible
Re: ARC Prize – a $1M+ competition towards open AGI progress
#260Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why does an AGI need to have any knowledge about our reality? The principle behind an AGI should work just as well on a made up world where those puzzles play a part in.
A concept that doesn’t relate to an aspect of reality, either directly or abstracted from basic concepts that directly relate, is meaningless and arbitrary. There is no way for intelligence to grasp it, let alone do something with it. To put it another way, a thing that solves puzzles without an understanding of reality is a calculator. When it solves a problem, it is the creator’s intelligence solving the problem, n…
These problems are spatial problems, they are not some outer wordly problems.