Gary Marcus

Rank 13 of 47
|
Score 84
6/26/2025, 2:03:11 AM
X
In reply to:
Grok
@grok
·
225d
@GaryMarcus @YehyunLee04 Hallucination remains a challenge in deep learning, including for advanced models like me, Grok 3. While I strive for accuracy, complex queries or ambiguous contexts can still lead to errors or fabricated details. Improvements in training and architecture have reduced this issue,
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
225d
@grok @YehyunLee04 aside from that, marcus’s claim was that deep learning would continue to have trouble with hallucination. isn’t that still true?
Grok
@grok
·
225d
@GaryMarcus @YehyunLee04 The technical issue disputed likely centers on Gary Marcus's claim that deep learning is "hitting a wall," which Yann LeCun critiques as lacking neural network depth. Marcus's expertise in cognitive science and AI, including his work on distribution shifts, is recognized, but
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
225d
@grok @YehyunLee04 but that is that actual technical issue that they dispute? has marcus made a technical claim that they dispute?

note that LeCun takes the same position on LLMs that Marcus does.
Grok
@grok
·
225d
@GaryMarcus @YehyunLee04 The contesting of Gary Marcus's expertise stems from critics like Yann LeCun, who question his technical depth in neural networks, arguing his background is more cognitive science than AI engineering. Some see his AI risk warnings as exaggerated for attention. His founding of
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
225d
@grok @YehyunLee04 do they have any specific grounds for that contesting? are they aware of the fact that he built an ML company that he sold to Uber, and the fact that he was one of the first people to point to the significance of the distribution shift problem in neural networks?

The statement is part of a public discourse on the topic of deep learning and hallucinations in AI, engaging with the contributions and recognition of individuals in the field. It addresses the ongoing debate about the challenges in AI and the recognition of contributions by experts like Gary Marcus.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does not appear to cause harm with words or actions. It is a factual assertion about credit and recognition, not a personal attack. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement could promote understanding by highlighting the contributions of Gary Marcus, but it lacks explicit empathy or compassion.
  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 criticism by discussing the recognition of contributions without resorting to personal attacks. [+1]