Re:LLMs trained on “A is B” fail to learn “B is A”
by johnthewise on Saturday September 23, 2023 @08:56AM
(#37622854)
Sure, that wouldn't be impressive if you wrote tree search for chess. However, if you wrote a program that doesn't do any search and still plays well, that'd be impressive. I don't understand your claim that LLMs playing chess is anything sort of understanding.
related: https://parrotchess.com/
Re:LLMs trained on “A is B” fail to learn “B is A”
by xrisk on Saturday September 23, 2023 @09:27AM
(#37623032)
How do you know there’s no search involved?
Re:LLMs trained on “A is B” fail to learn “B is A”
by Jensson on Saturday September 23, 2023 @10:01AM
(#37623301)
It does more illegal moves the more you deviate from standard chess openings and positions and becomes unable to play at some point. If it did a tree search based on chess rules that wouldn't happen. If it encoded a lot of chess openings and some tiny ad hoc logic around those then that is exactly what we would expect.
Of course it’s a different question as to how exactly do humans understand chess.
I personally don’t believe humans have some sort of “special” intelligence, whatever we do must be computable and therefore doable by a computer. It’s just that todays LLMs don’t seem to be it.