Pundit ClaimsAI claims by Gary Marcus and Ed Zitron, with the evidence

There Must be Some Misunderstanding

We recorded 7 claims from this post. 4 were checked against evidence. 3 can’t be checked. Read the post at its source.

Claims from this post (7)

In the order they appear in the post. Each quotation is the speaker’s words in this post. A label such as “Supported” or “Can’t be checked” is the claim’s current assessment; its page has the evidence and the reasons.

  1. Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid

    Observation

    “These systems don’t deeply understand their inputs, contra Dr. Hinton, and as pointed out here regularly.”

    Our reading: Large language models do not deeply understand their inputs.

    No horizon

  2. Assessment: SupportedSaid

    Observation

    “Compositionality remains a problem. So does negation.”

    Our reading: Compositionality and negation remain problems for large language models.

    No horizon Evidence as of

    Limitation: Results depend on task, model version and prompt.

  3. Assessment: SupportedSaid

    Observation

    “Reliability remain a problem.”

    Our reading: Reliability remains a problem for large language models.

    No horizon Evidence as of

    Limitation: Benchmark performance varies by task and scoring method.

  4. Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid

    Recommendation or value judgment

    “You shouldn’t count on these systems.”

    Our reading: People should not rely on large language model systems.

    No horizon

  5. Assessment: SupportedSaid

    Observation

    “Scale isn’t everything, and hasn’t and won’t be enough to solve any of the problems I just listed above.”

    Our reading: Scaling has not been enough to solve the problems of understanding, compositionality, negation, and reliability in LLMs.

    No horizon Evidence as of

    Limitation: The result depends on treating understanding as observable interpretation and generalization.

  6. Assessment: UnresolvedSaid

    Forecast

    “Scale isn’t everything, and hasn’t and won’t be enough to solve any of the problems I just listed above.”

    Our reading: Scaling will not be enough to solve the problems of understanding, compositionality, negation, and reliability in LLMs.

    No deadline stated Evidence as of

    Limitation: The boundary between scaling and a new method is unclear.

  7. Assessment: Can’t be checkedSaid

    Recommendation or value judgment

    “We really should consider trying some other approaches to AI.”

    Our reading: The AI field should consider approaches to AI other than scaling large language models.

    No horizon