Likewise, LLMs are produced by a relatively simple training process (minimizing loss on next-token prediction, using a large training set from the internet, Github, Wikipedia etc.) but the resulting 175 billion parameter model is extremely inscrutable.
So the author is confusing the training process with the model. It’s like saying “although it may appear that humans are telling jokes and writing plays, all they are actually doing is optimizing for survival and reproduction”. This fallacy occurs throughout the paper.
The train/test framework is not hel... (read more)
We’re all more or less doing that when we speak or write, though there are times when we may set out to be deliberately surprising – but we can set such complications aside
We're all more or less doing that when we speak or write?
If you think of the LLM as a complex dynamical system, then the trajectory is a valley in the system’s attractor landscape.
The real argument here is that you can construct simple dynamical systems, in the sense that the equation is quite simple, that have complex behavior. For example, the Lorenz system though there should be an even more simple example of say, ergodic behavior.
The train/test framework is not hel... (read more)