No, the thing needing proof is the novel idea: that LLMs can produce original code.

marcus_holmes 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

LLMs can definitely produce original other stuff: ask it to create an original poem and on an extremely specific niche subject and it will do so. You can specify the niche subject to the point where it is incredibly unlikely that there is a poem on that subject in its training data, and it will still produce an original poem on that subject [0]. The well-known "otter using wifi on a plane" series of images [1] is another example: this is not in the training data (well, it is now, because well-known, but you get the idea).

Is there something unique about code, that is different from language (or images), that would make it impossible for an LLM to produce original code? I don't believe so, but I'm willing to be convinced.

I think this switches the burden of proof: we know LLMs can produce original content in other contexts. Why would they not be able to create original code?

[0] Ever curious, I tested this assumption. I got Claude to write an original limerick about goats oiling their beards with olive oil, which was the first reasonable thing I could think of as a suitably niche subject. I googled the result and could not find anything close to it. I then asked it to produce another limerick on the same subject, and it produced a different limerick, so obviously not just repeating training data.

[1] https://www.oneusefulthing.org/p/the-recent-history-of-ai-in...

▲

jacquesm 2 days ago | parent [-]

No, it transformed your prompt. Another person giving it the same prompt will get the same result when starting from the same state. f('your prompt here') is a transformation of your prompt based on hidden state.

	▲	marcus_holmes 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		This is also true of humans, see every debate on free will ever. The trick, of course, is getting to the exact same starting state.

▲

ChromaticPanic 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This just reeks of a lack of understanding of how transformers work. Unlike Markov Chains that can only regurgitate known sequences, transformers can actually make new combinations.

▲

handoflixue 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

What's your proof that the average college student can produce original code? I'm reasonably certain I can get an LLM to write something that will pass any test that the average college student can, as far as that goes.

	▲	moron4hire 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		I'm not asking about averages. I'm asking about any. There is no need to perform an academic research study to prove that humans are capable of writing original code because the existence of our conversation right now is the counter-example to disprove the negation. Yes, it is true that a lot of humans remix existing code. But not all. It has yet to be proven that any LLM is doing something more than remixing code. I would submit as evidence to this idea (LLMs are not capable of writing original code) the fact that not a single company using LLM-based AI coding has developed a novel product that has outpaced its competition. In any category. If AI really makes people "10x" more productive, then companies that adopted AI a year ago should be 10 years ahead of their competition. Substitute any value N > 1 you want and you won't see it. Indeed, given the stories we're seeing of the massive amounts of waste that is occurring within AI startups and companies adopting AI, it would suggest that N < 1.