>this LLM behavior can be analogized in terms of some human behavior, thus it follows that LLMs are human-like

No, the argument is "this behavior is similar enough to human behavior that using it as evidence against <claim regarding LLM capability that humans have> is specious"

>"Confabulation" in LLMs and "confabulation" in humans have basically nothing in common

I don't know why you think this. They seem to have a lot in common. I call it sensible nonsense. Humans are prone to this when self-reflective neural circuits break down. LLMs are characterized by a lack of self-reflective information. When critical input is missing, the algorithm will craft a narrative around the available, but insufficient information resulting in sensible nonsense (e.g. neural disorders such as somatoparaphrenia)

▲

root_axis an hour ago | parent [-]

> No, the argument is "this behavior is similar enough to human behavior that using it as evidence against <claim regarding LLM capability that humans have> is specious"

I'm not really following. LLM capabilities are self-evident, comparing them to a human doesn't add any useful information in that context.

> LLMs are characterized by a lack of self-reflective information. When critical input is missing, the algorithm will craft a narrative around the available, but insufficient information resulting in sensible nonsense (e.g. neural disorders such as somatoparaphrenia)

You're just drawing lines between superficial descriptions from disparate concepts that have a metaphorical overlap. It's also wrong. LLMs do not "craft a narrative around available information when critical input is missing", LLM confabulations are statistical, not a consequence of missing information or damage.

	▲	hackinthebochs an hour ago \| parent [-]
		>LLM capabilities are self-evident This is undermined by all the disagreement about what LLMs can do and/or how to characterize it. >LLM confabulations are statistical, not a consequence of missing information or damage. LLMs aren't statistical in any substantive sense. LLMs are a general purpose computing paradigm. They are circuit builders, the converged parameters define pathways through the architecture that pick out specific programs. Or as Karpathy puts it, LLMs are a differentiable computer[1]. So yes, narrative crafting in terms of leveraging available putative facts into a narrative is an apt characterization of what LLMs do. [1] https://x.com/karpathy/status/1582807367988654081