| ▲ | onlyrealcuzzo an hour ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
His main LLM predictions have almost nothing to do with Arc AGI... What exactly was he dead wrong about that is proven by any of this? GPT getting better has absolutely nothing to do with completely disproving anything LeCun has been saying. He never said LLMs couldn't get better. He never said they couldn't score 7.6% on Arc AGI 3. He's merely said they don't think, and you probably want something that actually thinks if you want a model that can be trained cheaply on a small amount of data and provide a ton of value. Spending $5B to train a model that scores better than an older model does not disprove any of that in any way. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | Tenoke an hour ago | parent [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
>He's merely said they don't think He said years ago even 'GPT 5000' couldnt do things that they ended up doing fine a month later, let alone by 5000. His later predictions are just moving that goal post including towards them not being able to do more general, harder problems of which Arc AGI is a counter-example. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||