| ▲ | simianwords 4 hours ago | |||||||
Asking earnestly, I don’t know what you mean by this reply. I know what system 1 and 2 is. But this has already been solved using same model. | ||||||||
| ▲ | lelanthran 4 hours ago | parent [-] | |||||||
> I know what system 1 and 2 is. But this has already been solved using same model. No, it hasn't. Maybe you have a different definition of System 1 and System 2. I last read the book well over a decade ago (2011, maybe? 2012?), but System 1 and System 2 are different systems. IOW, System 2 is not a more computational version of System 1. The argument you made implies that System 2 is just a more capable System 1, which is not what the book (nor this paper, AIUI) proposes. In computery terms, System 1 runs in O(1) time, System 2 runs in O(log n) (or maybe just O(n)) time. This means that any System 1 will run the input once through the heuristics, using the same computational power and taking the same time whether the input is 100 tokens or 1 million tokens, for quick but perhaps wrong decision (not "answer"). We don't have LLMs that do that. We have System 2 - run in O(log n) time and produce an answer. System 1 is completely bereft of thought. | ||||||||
| ||||||||