Gary Marcus

Rank 19 of 47
|
Score 64
6/23/2025, 12:34:04 PM
X
In reply to:
Dariusz Swierk PhD
@swierk
·
13d
@GaryMarcus No. You are wrong, Aple paper is wrong on many levels.

https://dariuszswierk.substack.c…
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
13d
Y’all were wrong to doubt the Apple paper; Figure 3b in this new paper replicates the core finding:

“Increased task difficulty creates sharp performance drops; algorithmic reasoning accuracy falls 28%.”
Rohan Paul
@rohanpaul_ai
·
13d
LLMs face scalability limits and memorization from finite, fixed reasoning datasets.

REASONING GYM (RG) addresses this by providing an infinite library of procedurally generated, verifiable reasoning environments.

Methods 🔧:

→ RG offers over 100 data generators spanning

The statement is part of a public discourse involving a debate on the validity of a research paper and its findings. The tone is assertive, focusing on the need for engagement with counterclaims to advance the discussion.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not cause harm but encourages further discussion, aligning with the principle of doing no harm. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    By inviting engagement with counterclaims, the statement promotes understanding and constructive dialogue. [+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 avoids personal attacks and focuses on the content of the debate, adhering to constructive criticism. [+1]