NeilBru comments on ChatGPT 'got absolutely wrecked' by Atari 2600 in beginner's chess match — OpenAI's newest model bamboozled by 1970s logic

I'm impressed, if that's true! In general, an LLM's training cost vs. an LSTM, RNN, or some other more appropriate DNN algorithm suitable for the ruleset is laughably high.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 3 child comments

[–] Takapapatapaka@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Oh yes, cost of training are ofc a great loss here, it's not optimized at all, and it's stuck at an average level.

Interestingly, i believe some people did research on it and found some parameters in the model that seemed to represent the state of the chess board (as in, they seem to reflect the current state of the board, and when artificially modified, the model takes modification into account in its playing). It was used by a french youtuber to show how LLMs can somehow have a kinda representation of the world. I can try to get the sources back if you're interested.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 2 child comments

[–] NeilBru@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 child)

Absolutely interested. Thank you for your time to share that.

My career path in neural networks began as a researcher for cancerous tissue object detection in medical diagnostic imaging. Now it is switched to generative models for CAD (architecture, product design, game assets, etc.). I don't really mess about with fine-tuning LLMs.

However, I do self-host my own LLMs as code assistants. Thus, I'm only tangentially involved with the current LLM craze.

But it does interest me, nonetheless!

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] Takapapatapaka@lemmy.world 1 point 1 year ago

Here is the main blog post that i remembered : it has a follow up, a more scientific version, and uses two other articles as a basis, so you might want to dig around what they mention in the introduction.

It is indeed a quite technical discovery, and it still lacks complete and wider analysis, but it is very interesting for the fact that it kinda invalidates the common gut feeling that llms are pure lucky random.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] Bleys@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

The underlying neural network tech is the same as what the best chess AIs (AlphaZero, Leela) use. The problem is, as you said, that ChatGPT is designed specifically as an LLM so it’s been optimized strictly to write semi-coherent text first, and then any problem solving beyond that is ancillary. Which should say a lot about how inconsistent ChatGPT is at solving problems, given that it’s not actually optimized for any specific use cases.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

hideshow 1 child comment

[–] NeilBru@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Yes, I agree wholeheartedly with your clarification.

My career path, as I stated in a different comment in regards to neural networks, is focused on generative DNNs for CAD applications and parametric 3D modeling. Before that, I began as a researcher in cancerous tissue classification and object detection in medical diagnostic imaging.

Thus, large language models are well out of my area of expertise in terms of the architecture of their models.

However, fundamentally it boils down to the fact that the specific large language model used was designed to predict text and not necessarily solve problems/play games to "win"/"survive".

(I admit that I'm just parroting what you stated and maybe rehashing what I stated even before that, but I like repeating and refining in simple terms to practice explaining to laymen and, dare I say, clients. It helps me feel as if I don't come off too pompously when talking about this subject to others; forgive my tedium.)

permalink

fedilink

source

parent

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 4 points 1 year ago*

Yeah, a lot of them hallucinate illegal moves.

permalink

fedilink

source

parent