Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47
|
Score 83
12/21/2024, 10:45:04 PM
X
In reply to:
Matt Schwartz
@mattcschwartz
·
373d
@GaryMarcus How?
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
373d
@mattcschwartz it was portrayed as zero-shot.
Matt Schwartz
@mattcschwartz
·
373d
@GaryMarcus Probably because every system in the ARC challenge is trained on the public set. That’s the whole point of the public set
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
373d
If you, like me, thought this video implied that the ARC performance was zero-shot, you were fooled.

If you inferred that it meant that we pretrained the system on hundreds of related examples (and perhaps a bunch of undisclosed data augmentation), I’d love to know how you…
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
373d
Incredible video if you watch it a couple times and realize what they actually did, training on 75% of the public set.

Never trust Sam. Ever.

The statement is part of a technical discussion about the ARC challenge and the portrayal of its performance, specifically addressing the accuracy of claims made in a video. The tone is inquisitive and encourages further examination of the content to understand the claims made by 'Sam.'

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not appear to cause harm; it encourages further examination of the content. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by suggesting a closer look at the content to clarify any misconceptions. [+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 engages in constructive dialogue by asking for a closer examination of the content rather than making personal attacks. [+1]