Gary Marcus

Rank 14 of 47
|
Score 83
12/21/2024, 10:54:21 PM
X
In reply to:
Matt Schwartz
@mattcschwartz
·
373d
@GaryMarcus Okay, that’s fine, but I think people with a good understanding of the challenge probably did because they know that all models in the competition are trained on the public set. So I don’t think it’s fair to say they mislead anyone
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
373d
@mattcschwartz i don’t dispute that their performance was better; i did not walk away from the video knowing that they had trained on hundreds of related examples.
Matt Schwartz
@mattcschwartz
·
373d
@GaryMarcus You mean at the end when he says they didn’t do anything special to target this challenge? That’s totally fair, they train on basically everything on the internet, which includes the ARC public set. I guarantee you all the models are trained on it and they couldn’t solve it
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
373d
@mattcschwartz did you watch the clip? watch it a couple times, focusing on what Sam says.
Matt Schwartz
@mattcschwartz
·
373d
@GaryMarcus How?
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
373d
@mattcschwartz it was portrayed as zero-shot.

The statement is part of a public discourse about the transparency and fairness of AI model training and evaluation, specifically regarding whether models were trained on specific datasets. The tone is analytical and seeks clarification on the training process.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not appear to cause harm and is focused on clarifying a misunderstanding. [+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, as it does not engage in cyberbullying or hate speech. [+1]
  3. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement aims to promote understanding by clarifying a potential misunderstanding about AI training. [+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 dialogue by addressing a specific point of disagreement without personal attacks. [+1]