Re:OK, I can partly explain the LLM chess weirdness now
by wizzwizz4 on Friday November 22, 2024 @07:50PM
(#42218520)
The architecture of the model does place limits on how much computation can be performed per token generated, though. Combined with the window size, that's a hard bound on computational complexity that's significantly lower than a Turing machine – unless you do something clever with the program that drives the model.
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:OK, I can partly explain the LLM chess weirdness now
by vidarh on Saturday November 23, 2024 @06:32AM
(#42220397)
Hence the requirement for using the context for IO. A Turing machine requires two memory "slots" (the position of the read head, and the current state) + IO and a loop. That doesn't require much cleverness at all.