w6 Flashcards
(33 cards)
The presentation contrasts ELIZA and modern LLMs. How does the transition from symbolic programming to artificial neural networks impact the interpretability and ethical concerns of these systems?
Neural networks operate as “black boxes,” making their decision-making processes difficult to interpret, unlike symbolic systems with explicit rules. This lack of transparency raises ethical concerns about accountability, bias, and fairness in AI applications.
Explain why benchmarking in AI is considered “broken,” and propose a cognitive psychology-inspired approach to better evaluate LLMs’ abilities.
Benchmarks fail because LLMs often exploit dataset shortcuts without true understanding. A psychology-inspired approach would use hypothesis-driven evaluations that mimic human cognitive tasks, such as theory-of-mind tests adapted for token prediction, as suggested in the presentation.
How do the challenges of the “last 10%” problem reflect broader limitations in AI generalization and understanding?
The “last 10%” highlights AI’s struggle with variability, context sensitivity, and edge cases, which require a depth of reasoning and adaptability that current systems lack. This reflects their reliance on patterns rather than conceptual understanding, as discussed in Chapter 13.
How might LLMs’ lack of grounding in physical or social experiences affect their ability to handle theory-of-mind tasks?
Without grounding, LLMs cannot form causal or intentional models, leading to superficial responses in theory-of-mind tasks. Their outputs might mimic understanding but lack the depth required for accurate social reasoning.
How do content-sensitive patterns observed in reasoning tasks challenge traditional views of symbolic reasoning, and what does this mean for AI’s potential?
Content-sensitive patterns suggest that LLMs can mimic human-like reasoning without explicitly following symbolic rules. This challenges traditional views by proposing that statistical models may develop novel forms of reasoning, distinct from human cognition.
What is a key reason benchmarking is considered “broken” for evaluating LLMs, as discussed in the presentation?
a) Benchmarks fail to measure computational efficiency.
b) LLMs solve benchmarks using superficial patterns rather than deeper understanding.
c) Benchmarks only evaluate explicit bias and not implicit bias.
d) Benchmarks rely on human testers, which introduces variability.
b)LLMs solve benchmarks using superficial patterns rather than deeper understanding.
Why does the presentation argue that targeted evaluation is preferable to standard benchmarking for LLMs?
a) It requires less computational power.
b) It aligns with the principle of avoiding sweeping conclusions about LLMs.
c) It allows for faster model fine-tuning.
d) It eliminates biases in the training data.
: b) It aligns with the principle of avoiding sweeping conclusions about LLMs.
According to the Mitchell-Krakauer article, why is “scale is all you need” considered a controversial claim?
a) It dismisses the need for diverse training data.
b) It overlooks the importance of model interpretability.
c) It assumes that increasing model size will lead to genuine understanding.
d) It disregards the role of emergent abilities in smaller models.
c) It assumes that increasing model size will lead to genuine understanding.
What principle is emphasized in the presentation to evaluate LLMs’ theory-of-mind abilities?
a) Using explicit rule-based reasoning tasks.
b) Translating cognitive tasks into token prediction tasks.
c) Measuring emotional alignment with human responses.
d) Ensuring the model has not seen the test during training.
b) Translating cognitive tasks into token prediction tasks.
Which of the following is NOT a challenge identified in Chapter 13’s “last 10%” problem?
a) Speech recognition systems handling unknown words.
b) Machine translation systems interpreting idiomatic expressions.
c) Object detection systems failing on common objects.
d) AI models understanding nuanced contextual meaning.
c) Object detection systems failing on common objects.
True or False: According to the presentation, modern LLMs like GPT-4 are interpretable due to their self-learning mechanisms.
False
True or False: The Mitchell-Krakauer article argues that LLMs rely on statistical patterns and lack grounding in physical and social experiences.
True
True or False: Chapter 13 suggests that the “last 10%” problem for speech recognition is primarily caused by computational inefficiency.
Answer: False
True or False: The presentation highlights that implicit bias in LLMs can persist even in models explicitly fine-tuned to eliminate explicit bias.
Answer: True
True or False: Benchmarking AI on standard datasets is still considered the best way to measure understanding and reasoning abilities.
Answer: False
Three key principles of LLM psychology
- Transform cognitive task into word prediction task
- Consider (and control for) the training data
- Avoid sweeping conclusions (and sweeping questions)
explain what does the 1st principle mean (LLMs as next-token prediction machines)
At their core, Large Language Models (LLMs) are prediction machines designed to compute the likelihood of the next token (word or character) given a sequence of prior tokens.
This principle emphasizes that all behaviors exhibited by LLMs, such as reasoning or answering questions, stem from this fundamental task.
Implication: To fairly evaluate LLMs, any cognitive or reasoning task must be reframed as a next-token prediction problem.
explain the principle 2 - Consider the training data
Modern LLMs are trained on astronomical amounts of data, often without full transparency regarding the datasets.
This introduces the possibility that models may have encountered test cases during training (data contamination).
Implication: Evaluations of LLMs must account for the training data to avoid overestimating their generalization abilities.
explain the principle 3 - Avoid sweeping conclusions (and sweeping questions)
LLMs’ behaviors should not lead to overgeneralized claims about their capabilities or limitations.
Example: A failure in one context does not imply a lack of understanding, just as a success does not equate to humanlike reasoning.
Implication: Researchers should adopt a nuanced approach, avoiding extreme skepticism or overconfidence, and focus on specific abilities in well-defined contexts.
Machine psychology
Machine psychology, is the study of artificial systems, such as large language models (LLMs), to understand their behavior and capabilities through psychological principles.
- It involves analyzing their outputs (e.g., reasoning, language use) as emergent properties of their design (e.g., next-token prediction) and training data, while emphasizing that these systems do not think or understand like humans.
- It focuses on evaluating machine “cognition” using tools and frameworks from human psychology but tailored to the limitations and mechanics of AI systems.
can you explain nativism vs emergentism/conectionism
- nativism suggests that LLMs might succeed at certain tasks because their architecture mimics innate principles, like statistical learning frameworks. .
- Emergentism/Connectionism, by contrast, frames LLM abilities as arising from their exposure to vast amounts of training data and the learned patterns within, rather than any “innate” programming of specific cognitive structures.
- LMs can produce fluent text — but do they actually know the rules of grammar?
✅ Yes!
If model knows grammar, then: P(grammatical) > P(ungrammatical)
whats the problem with this logic
- Problem: many factors affect word probability — beyond grammar!
- Solution: use minimal pars, pairs of sentences with minimal difference!
- Ideally: sentences do not occur in training data (syntactic generalisation)
But are they truly reasoning, or are they just parroting and pattern matching?
Traditional (symbolic) view
► LLMs only use “simple heuristics” rather than true abstract reasoning
► Their apparent reasoning is just pattern matching from training data
Emergentist (connectionist)
► Human reasoning is not logical, but
content-sensitive and contextual
► These reasoning patterns emerge
naturally from DNN/LLM training
false dichtomy, they do both
t or f
Both humans and LLMs much better when content supports conclusion!
T