Gary Marcus

Rank 22 of 47
|
Score 35
5/2/2024, 4:59:31 AM
X
In reply to:
Olivia P. Walker
@olivia_p_walker
·
502d
@GaryMarcus “laws v. trends” is an interesting convo
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
502d
Scaling “laws” were never laws.

They were trends. Trends whose time may be up.

13.5 months and $50B post GPT-4, GPT-4 remains on top.
Noam Brown
@polynoamial
·
502d
Many have pointed out that LLM benchmarks are broken and gamed. Happy to see my former resident @hughbzhang, @summeryue0, and the great @scale_AI folks do something about it! They made a private version of GSM8k and evaled GPT-4, Claude, Mixtral, Phi, etc: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2405.00332

The statement by @olivia_p_walker in response to @GaryMarcus's comment about scaling laws being trends rather than laws, and the subsequent discussion about the effectiveness and evaluation of large language models (LLMs), constitutes public discourse. It engages in a substantive discussion about the development and assessment of AI technologies, which is a significant topic in the field of artificial intelligence and its societal implications.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does no harm as it contributes to a technical and scientific discussion without targeting or harming any individuals or groups. [+1]
  2. Principle 2:
    I will respect the privacy and dignity of others and will not engage in cyberbullying, harassment, or hate speech.
    The statement respects the privacy and dignity of others by focusing on the topic of AI development and its challenges without divulging personal information or engaging in personal attacks. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by referencing a specific academic paper and engaging in a dialogue that could enlighten others about the current state and limitations of AI technologies. [+1]
  4. 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 engages in constructive criticism of the field by pointing out the perceived limitations of current AI models, which encourages further discussion and potential reevaluation of methods and benchmarks in AI research. [+1]
  5. Principle 5:
    I will acknowledge and correct my mistakes.
    The statement acknowledges the author's previous work and its reception, which shows a willingness to correct or clarify past misunderstandings or misinterpretations. [+1]
  6. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The statement uses the influence of the speaker to contribute to a better understanding of AI technologies and their evaluation, which could lead to improvements in the field. [+1]
  7. Principle 7:
    I will uphold the principles of free speech and use my platform responsibly and with integrity.
    The statement upholds the principles of free speech by using the platform to share opinions and information responsibly, contributing to the broader discourse on AI development. [+1]