Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47
|
Score 83
4/18/2024, 8:20:58 PM
X
In reply to:
davidad 🎇
@davidad
·
622d
@GaryMarcus @MatthewJBar I’m confident Gemini Ultra training was stopped as soon as it exceeded GPT-4 and human MMLU scores.
Both to keep the race from escalating any more than necessary, & to avoid spending any more compute/talent resource than necessary (given a mandate from the market to be “on top”).
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
622d
@MatthewJBar My x axis would be tome, but even on yours why wouldn’t Gemini Ultra count?
Matthew Barnett
@MatthewJBar
·
622d
I think the plateau hypothesis should be operationalized by looking at returns to compute scaling. As far as we know, no model so far released was trained on more than 10^26 FLOP, so we don't have much evidence for or against this theory yet.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
622d
Each massive new model that is NOT better than GPT-4 is a bit of evidence for the hypothesis of a plateau or diminishing returns.

Each massive new model that is NOT better than GPT-4 is a bit of evidence that we are NOT still on an exponential rise.

Everyone understands that,…

The statement '@davidad @MatthewJBar Nonsense' is a response in a technical discussion about the development and implications of AI technologies, specifically regarding the training and performance of machine learning models like Gemini Ultra compared to GPT-4. The statement is brief and dismissive, providing a critical reaction to the preceding detailed explanation about why the training of Gemini Ultra was halted.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does minimal harm but could be seen as dismissive, which might stifle productive discourse. [-1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement lacks respect for the dignity of the previous commenter's detailed analysis, potentially undermining a respectful exchange of ideas. [-1]
  3. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement does not promote understanding or compassion, as it dismissively labels the previous comment as 'nonsense' without elaboration. [-1]
  4. Principle 5:
    I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.
    The statement does not acknowledge the complexity of the issue or correct any specific mistakes, missing an opportunity to contribute constructively. [-1]