[deleted]
Language models can explain neurons in language models
421–430 of 497 posts
Re: Language models can explain neurons in language models
#422More in detail:
https://openaipublic.blob.core.windows.net/neuron-explainer/...
Re: Language models can explain neurons in language models
#423Can't see how using AI to explain AI could ever go wrong
Skynet anybody?
Re: Language models can explain neurons in language models
#424Earlier quoted context omitted.
that is absolutely fascinating and also makes me extremely uncomfortable
It's probably way worse than we can imagine. Reading/listening to someone like Robert Sapolsky [1] makes me laugh I could have ever hallucinated about such a muddy, not even wrong concept as "free will". Furthermore, between the brain and, say, the liver there is only a difference of speed/data integrity inasmuch as one cares to look for information processing as basal cognition: neurons firing in the brain, voltage-…
[dead]
Re: Language models can explain neurons in language models
#425Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's probably way worse than we can imagine. Reading/listening to someone like Robert Sapolsky [1] makes me laugh I could have ever hallucinated about such a muddy, not even wrong concept as "free will". Furthermore, between the brain and, say, the liver there is only a difference of speed/data integrity inasmuch as one cares to look for information processing as basal cognition: neurons firing in the brain, voltage-…
The biggest problem with the current popular idea of “free will” is that people think it means they’re ineffably unpredictable. They’re uncomfortable with the notion that if you were to simulate their brain in sufficient detail, you could predict thoughts and reaction. They take refuge in pseudoscientific mumbling about the links to the Quantum, for they have heard it is special and unpredictable. And that’s just the…
[dead]
Re: Language models can explain neurons in language models
#426Can't wait for West World style sex robots!
Re: Language models can explain neurons in language models
#427Earlier quoted context omitted.
Says who? There is actual evidence to support that our brain doesn't "know" what it is doing on a subconscious level? As far as I'm aware it's more that conscious humans don't understand how our brain works. I think the correct statement is "so far the answer is we don't know"
The split brain experiments very very clearly indicate that different parts of the brain can independently conduct behavior and gain knowledge independently of other parts. How or if this generalizes to healthy brains is not super clear, but it does actually provide a good explanatory model for all sorts of self-contradictory behavior (like addiction): the brain has many semi-independent “interests” that are jockeyin…
You're ignoring several confounders and conflating several loosely related things that I'm not even sure what the point you're making is anymore.
To begin with, the split-brain experiments don't provide clear or strong evidence for anything given the small sample size, heterogeneity in procedure (i.e. was there complete comissurotomy or just callosotomy) and the elapsed time between neuropsychiatric evaluation and initial procedures which relies on the assumption that adaptation does not occur and neuroplasticity is not a thing. The split-brain experiments are notable because the lab experiments SUGGEST the lack of communication between two hemispheres and a split conscious however this is paradoxical with everyday experience of these patients, far from providing evidence for anything.
Ignoring that for a moment, how do the split-brain experiments support 'the brain has many semi-independent “interests” that are jockeying for overall control of the organism’s behavior'?
How is addiction self-contradictory exactly and what does this have to do with split-brain?
If your point is that different parts of the brain (e.g. the reward system and the executive function regions) have different roles this isn't really debatable, obviously different parts of the brain are all doing their individual jobs and the most widely accepted theory is that these are integrated in some unknown mechanism by a single consciousness which remains in control.
Your original statement of: does the brain know what the brain is doing. The answer so far does not seem to be "yes."
Suggests you're arguing that the brain has many different consciouses that are in a constant battle, i.e. there is not a unified consciousness in control of behavior.
To take your addiction example, the brain is very much aware of what it is doing and addiction is not self-contradictory because short term rewards are being valued above long-term ones and health of the organism. The reward system model provides an excellent neurobiological explanation for addiction.
This is not directly evidenced by either addiction or the split brain experiments and is at best a hypothetical model hence why it's a theory and my original response to your statement.
Re: Language models can explain neurons in language models
#428Earlier quoted context omitted.
We know that complex arrangements of neurons are triggered based on input and generating output that appears to have some intelligence to many humans. The more interesting question is why are intelligence/beauty/consciousness emergent properties that exist in our minds.
Nature created humans to understand nature. We created GPT4 to understand ourselves.
Yes, "all serve "gpt4!" Get a grip, pretty please.
Re: Language models can explain neurons in language models
#429Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you spent even more time with GPT-4 it would be evident that it is definitely not. Especially if you try to use it as some kind of autonomous agent.
AI research has put hardly any effort into building goal-directed agents / A-Life since the advent of Machine Learning. A-Life was last really "looked into" in the '70s, back when "AI" meant Expert Systems and Behavior Trees. All the effort in AI research since the advent of Machine Learning, has been focused on making systems that — in neurological terms — are given a sensory stimulus of a question, and then passive…
I wouldn't assume a single biological neuron is simple like an artificial neuron is.
Computationally, a biological neuron is equivalent to something like an entire artificial neural net.
Re: Language models can explain neurons in language models
#430Earlier quoted context omitted.
OpenAI doesn't support fine tuning of GPT4 and with context stuffing,the more of the book I include in the input the less of the bills I can include - which, again, are millions of tokens - and the less space there is for memory.
I believe you. But at the same time they showed during the demo how it can do taxes, using a multi page document. An ability to process longer documents seems more like an engineering challenge rather than a fundamental limitation.
Doing taxes using a few small forms designed together by the same agency is not as impressive as you think it is. The instructions are literally printed on the form in English for the kind of people who you consider dumber than ChatGPT.
It quickly breaks down even at 8k with legislation that is even remotely nontrivial.