“Each new bigger, more expensive model ekes out measurable improvements, but returns appear to be diminishing (that’s what Sutskever is saying about the Kaplan laws) and none of these experiments has solved core issues around hallucinations, generalization, planning and reasoning, as Sutskever too now recognizes.”
Our reading:
Larger LLMs give measurable but apparently diminishing improvements.
Assessment: Can’t be checked
What happened
Not graded on evidence
Outcome: Can’t be checked
An opinion, a recommendation, or too vague to test. Listed, not scored.
Evidence up to . Checked .
Why
Marcus says returns “appear to be diminishing,” without specifying a metric or denominator (marcus-a-trillion-dollars-is-a-terrible-9a927b-o1). Under the resolution contract, this hedged trend is not scored. The measurable-improvements clause does not make the diminishing-returns claim definite.
Caveats
- The evidence packet contains no empirical evidence establishing whether scaling returns diminished.
- The separate assertion about unresolved hallucination, generalization, planning and reasoning problems is outside this assessment.
Evidence (0 items)
Claims like this aren’t scored, so there is no evidence to show.
How we judged it
- Kind of claim
- Observation
- Deadline
- None given. We don’t add one.
Where we had to interpret
- The selected proposition concerns improvements from LLM scaling. The separate assertion about unresolved hallucination, generalization, planning and reasoning problems is outside this assessment.
- Marcus describes diminishing returns as an appearance, not a definite trend. His wording does not commit to a particular benchmark, compute denominator or rate of decline.
- The measurable-improvements component is testable on its own, but it does not justify converting the hedged diminishing-returns component into a firm claim.
We don’t grade claims like this. We only check the quote and who said it.
We found 17 claims in this post. See them all.
Full record
Source and dates
Marcus on AI, A trillion dollars is a terrible thing to waste, paragraph 19.
- Said
- We read the source
- live page, full text, public
- Evidence up to
- Checked
We read this wording on 2026-10-28. The post may have been edited after 2025-11-27.
Where it was said (1)
Said once in the posts we read.
: Marcus on AI, A trillion dollars is a terrible thing to waste
Each new bigger, more expensive model ekes out measurable improvements, but returns appear to be diminishing (that’s what Sutskever is saying about the Kaplan laws) and none of these experiments has solved core issues around hallucinations, generalization, planning and reasoning, as Sutskever too now recognizes.
- Where
- paragraph 19
- Published
- 2025-11-27
- We read it
- , live page
- Access
- full text, public
History
Versions
- Current: Can’t be checked. Evidence up to 2026-10-28.
What happened to this record
PublishedBy us
Published after both AI reviews and the final check passed.
Held backBy us
A reviewer said our test wasn’t fair to what was actually said.