Gary Marcus

Rank 13 of 47
|
Score 83
12/22/2024, 1:59:18 PM
X
In reply to:
Adan Z Becerra, PhD
@AdanBecerraPhD
·
387d
@DFinsterwalder @GaryMarcus The best thing OAI could’ve done is tested and released the score of the base model. Even Chollet thinks this would’ve been a valuable data point.
François Chollet
@fchollet
·
388d
@itsvarora @NielsRogge This would be a very valuable data point, but we didn't have access to the base model -- I suppose we'll have the answer when the model goes public
David Finsterwalder
@DFinsterwalder
·
387d
Oh no. I misunderstood the generalization in the ARC AGI challenge and now @GaryMarcus liked my reply.

For the record: I started to look into the debate and started reading the paper and from what I see here: Gary is most likely wrong. The test set seems very different.

The conversation involves a technical discussion about AI model testing and generalization, specifically regarding OpenAI's practices and the ARC AGI challenge. The participants are engaging in a debate about the validity and transparency of the testing process, with some expressing skepticism and others seeking clarification.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The discussion is technical and does not appear to cause harm. It focuses on understanding and improving AI testing practices. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The conversation promotes understanding by discussing the importance of transparency in AI model testing. [+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.
    Participants engage in constructive dialogue, questioning and clarifying points without personal attacks. [+1]