Gary Marcus

Rank 25 of 47
|
Score 40
1/11/2025, 5:38:38 PM
X
In reply to:
davinci
@basedneoleo
·
25d
@GaryMarcus okay sure i'll rephrase this without the "vibes".

principled methods for tackling the fragility under distribution shifts, and consequently the poor OOD generalization of neural networks, build on top of the causality literature, particularly causal representation learning. the…
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
25d
@basedneoleo
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
25d
AI twitter used to be (at its best) about intellectual argument.

Now it’s mostly just about vibes.
davinci
@basedneoleo
·
25d
@GaryMarcus there are many emerging (yes principled ones). i regret to inform u that all the most promising ones are neural not symbolic.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
25d
This is literally a trillion dollar question: are *principled* solutions to longstanding challenges of factuality and distribution shift at last near at hand?
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
25d
@boazbaraktcs I think the West Coasters have not fully reckoned with how much distribution shift continues to plague reliability, and still lack a robust solution to that.

They also lack a principled solution to problems of factuality.

The statement is part of a broader discussion on AI, specifically addressing the challenges of distribution shifts and the role of causality and symbolic methods in improving neural networks' generalization. This is a substantive engagement with public issues related to AI technology and its development.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm and is focused on a technical discussion, adhering to the principle of doing no harm. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by engaging in a technical discussion about AI methodologies, aligning with the principle of promoting understanding and empathy. [+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 suggesting an approach to incorporate symbols in causality, without resorting to personal attacks, thus adhering to the principle of constructive criticism. [+1]