Gary Marcus

Rank 13 of 47
|
Score 115
8/31/2025, 2:35:02 PM
X
In reply to:
Carlos E. Perez
@IntuitMachine
·
10d
@GaryMarcus How is "neurosymbolic" defined differently from semiotics?
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
11d
Like I have been saying since 2001, embeddings aren’t enough.

Sooner or later. you are going to need true compositionality.

In the end neurosymbolic AI will win, and win big.
Rohan Paul
@rohanpaul_ai
·
11d
BRILLIANT @GoogleDeepMind research.

Even the best embeddings cannot represent all possible query-document combinations, which means some answers are mathematically impossible to recover.

Reveals a sharp truth, embedding models can only capture so many pairings, and beyond that,

The statement is part of a technical discussion on AI, specifically about the limitations of embedding models and the potential of neurosymbolic AI. It questions the definition of 'neurosymbolic' in relation to 'semiotics,' indicating a deeper inquiry into the conceptual frameworks of AI. The tone is inquisitive and seeks clarification, contributing to a nuanced understanding of AI methodologies.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement does no harm and is part of a constructive dialogue. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    It promotes understanding by seeking clarification on complex topics. [+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.
    Engages in constructive criticism by questioning definitions without personal attacks. [+1]