Gary Marcus

Rank 12 of 47
|
Score 83
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
834d
@ChrSzegedy @MCHammer @Grady_Booch Great - theorem proving bet back on! Here are some proposed rules from @ErnestSDavis. He offers $200, which I am doubling, for a total $400 on our side, with @MCHammer and @Grady_Booch as our witnesses :)
9/4/2024, 1:57:53 PM
X
In reply to:
Daniel Litt
@littmath
·
514d
@GaryMarcus @ChrSzegedy @colin_fraser @Lang__Leon I find what @ChrSzegedy is saying here reasonably plausible (though I don't know about your bet) -- LLMs alone clearly can't do math well but I think there's now some evidence that with formalization they can be valuable.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
514d
@ChrSzegedy @colin_fraser @Lang__Leon @littmath see thread above
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
514d
@ChrSzegedy @colin_fraser @Lang__Leon I am less sanguine but would love to hear your thoughts in more detail if you can share. @ChrSzegedy
Christian Szegedy
@ChrSzegedy
·
514d
@colin_fraser @Lang__Leon @GaryMarcus Good point. Still I am more confident about our bet with Gary than ever.

Autoformalization and formal verification will take care of all this.
Colin Fraser
@colin_fraser
·
514d
@ChrSzegedy @Lang__Leon @GaryMarcus also the last line there says that 8/9 is approximately 0.888... but it is in fact exactly 0.888...
Christian Szegedy
@ChrSzegedy
·
514d
@Lang__Leon @colin_fraser @GaryMarcus True

The statement and the preceding conversation constitute public discourse as they engage in a substantive discussion about the capabilities of AI in mathematical theorem proving, a topic of public interest in the fields of AI and mathematics.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The conversation appears to be respectful and focused on the topic of AI's capabilities in theorem proving, thus striving to do no harm. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The discussion promotes understanding and empathy by engaging in a detailed and technical debate about AI's potential and limitations. [+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 participants engage in constructive criticism and dialogue, discussing their differing viewpoints without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]
  4. Principle 6:
    I will use my influence for the betterment of society.
    The conversation uses the platform to discuss a significant technological and scientific issue, contributing to the betterment of society by exploring the potential of AI. [+1]