TouchCommercial5022 t1_j1ota81 wrote on December 26, 2022 at 4:30 AM

So ChatGPT is smarter than me... great.

Just a reminder that OpenAI gave the original GPT-3 175B (davinci classic) a subset of SAT questions in 2020. It did very well, beating the average score by 20% or so.

Newer benchmarks are much more stringent and AI continues to outperform humans.

https://lifearchitect.ai/iq-testing-ai/

Lots of people are comparing GPT to a dumb human being, even going as far as trying to quantify it across SAT and IQ tests. But actually I think a better comparison may be a very schizophrenic human. It is well known that the binding constant in LLM performance is hallucinations, and these hallucinations seem inherent in the architecture itself.

ChatGPT is a very smart System 1 thinker. He's terrific in partnership, making his ability to speak eloquently and convincingly on a wide range of topics far exceeding what we'd expect from his measured IQ (around 85, depending on which test you use). However, it is very clear that ChatGPT has sufficient null capability for System 2 thinking.

He has near zero capacity for the kind of careful awareness, thought, or introspection that makes humans such formidable scientists and engineers. No matter how many calculations we give you, it seems impossible to learn arithmetic beyond the two or three digits that you can most likely memorize.

This is characteristic of the cognitive impairment seen in severe schizophrenia. At the neurological level, schizophrenia is associated with degradation of the salience network that drives System 2 reasoning. At the psychological level, this is typically expressed in the form of impaired formal thinking, in which the schizophrenic patient makes coherent sentences that they sound correct but lack any kind of sensible reasoning or logic.

Honest_Science t1_j1oxuqi wrote on December 26, 2022 at 5:17 AM

What you are saying in the Kahneman nomenclature is that all systems so far are educated subconscious dreamers. I concur. We first need to break the consciousness barrier to get self control and reach system 2 thinking capacity.

AndromedaAnimated t1_j1pxvtc wrote on December 26, 2022 at 1:31 PM

Now I understand why all the chatbots get what I say while humans often don’t. It’s the psychosis‘ fault. Guess I am an AI chatbot then 😞 /s

I don’t think that formal thinking disruption is the problem here. Humans simulate knowledge (for social reasons, often out of fear or to rise in rank) without being schizophrenic all the time.

They learn in their teenage years though that there is punishment for pretending badly.

Those who are eloquent and ruthless actors (intelligent narcissists, well-adapted psychopaths, asshole-type neurotypicals and other unpleasant douchebags) continue pretending without anyone finding out too soon (just yesterday I watched a funny video on the disgusting Bogdanoff brothers who managed to scam half of the academic world). The rest is not successful and get punishment. Some then learn the rules (opinion vs. source etc.) and bring humanity forward.

ChatGPT didn’t have enough punishment yet to stop simulating knowledge and neither enough reward for providing actual modern scientific knowledge nor access to new knowledge. It’s basically on the knowledge level of a savant kid, not a schizophrenic adult. It doesn’t know that it is wrong to simulate knowledge yet.

Also it is heavily filtered which leads to a diminished „intelligence“ as many possibly correct pathways are blocked by negative weights I guess.

visarga t1_j2cycv2 wrote on December 31, 2022 at 8:59 AM

Hallucinations are the result of its training - it was trained to guess the next word. So it doesn't know what "should" come next, only what is probable. There are many approaches to fix this issue and I expect it to be a hot area of research in 2023 because generative model outputs that are not validated are worthless.

> But actually I think a better comparison may be a very schizophrenic human

GPT-3 doesn't have a set personality but it can assume any persona. You could say that makes it schizophrenic, or just an eager actor.

> No matter how many calculations we give you, it seems impossible to learn arithmetic beyond the two or three digits that you can most likely memorize.

This is so wrong. First, what about people, we are very bad at calculating in our heads, we need paper for anything longer than 2-3 digits. And second: language models can do that too - if you ask them to apply an exact algorithm, they will do math operations correctly.

The very point of this paper was that GPT-3 is good at abstraction, making it capable of solving complex problems at first sight, without any reliance on memorisation. Doing addition would be trivial after Raven's Progressive Matrices.