Of course 99.9% of humans also struggle with competitive programming. It seems to be an overly high bar for AGI if it has to compete with experts from every single field.

That said, GPT has no model of the world. It has no concept of how true the text it is generating is. Its going to be hard for me to think of that as AGI.

it's an overly high bar, but it seems well on its way to competing with experts from every field. it's terrifying.

and I'm not so sure it has no model of the world. a textual model, sure, but considering it can recognize what svgs are pictures of from the coordinates alone, that's not much of a limitation maybe.

> well on its way to competing with experts from every field

competing with them at what, precisely?

Even the current GPT has models of the domains it was trained on. That is why it can solve unseen problems within those domains. What it lacks is the ability to generalize beyond the domains. (And I did not suggest it was an AGI.)

If an LLM can solve Codeforces problems as well as a strong competitor—-in my hypothetical future LLM—-what else can it not do as well as competent humans (aside from physical tasks)?

>That said, GPT has no model of the world.

I don't think this is necessarily true. Here is an example where researchers trained a transformer to generate legal sequences of moves in the board game Othello. Then they demonstrated that the internal state of the model did, in fact, have a representation of the board.

https://arxiv.org/abs/2210.13382

That's a GPT and it's specific for one dataset of one game. How would someone extend that to all games and all other fields of human endeavor?

I'm not sure, the reason you could prove for Othello that the 'world model' exists is that the state is so simple there is really only one reasonable way to represent it with a vector (one component for each square). Even for something like chess there is a huge amount of choice for how to represent the board, yet alone trying represent the state of the actual world.

I am not a species chauvinist. 1) Unless a biotech miracle happen, which is unlikely, we are all going to die anyway; 2) If an AI will continue life and research and will increase complexity after humans, what is the difference?

It's AMC-12 scores aren't awful. It's at roughly 50th percentile for AMC which (given who takes the AMC) probably puts it in the top 5% or so of high school students in math ability. It's AMC 10 score being dramatically lower is pretty bad though...

> It's AMC 10 score being dramatically lower is pretty bad though...

The only explanation I can imagine for that is that it can't understand diagrams.

I wonder why gpt is so bad at AP English Literature

wouldn't it be funny if knowledge workers could all be automated, except for English majors?

The Revenge of the Call Centre

We don't have to worry so much about that. I think the most likely "loss of control" scenario is that the AI becomes a benevolent caretaker, who "loves" us but views us as too dim to properly take care of ourselves, and thus curtails our freedom "for our own good."

We're still a very very long way from machines being more generally capable and efficient than biological systems, so even an oppressive AI will want to keep us around as a partner for tasks that aren't well suited to machines. Since people work better and are less destructive when they aren't angry and oppressed, the machine will almost certainly be smart enough to veil its oppression, and not squeeze too hard. Ironically, an "oppressive" AI might actually treat people better than Republican politicians.

Things like that probably require some kind of thinking ahead, which models of things kind kind of can't do-- something like beam search.

Language models that utilise beam search can calculate integrals ('Deep learning for symbolic mathematics', Lample, Charton, 2019, https://openreview.net/forum?id=S1eZYeHFDS), but without it it doesn't work.

However, beam search makes bad language models. I got linked this paper ('Locally typical sampling' https://arxiv.org/pdf/2202.00666.pdf) when I asked some people why beam search only works for the kind of stuff above. I haven't fully digested it though.