Talking About Large Language Models
AI-generated Key Points
- Large language models (LLMs) such as Bert and GPT-2 have transformed the field of AI
- LLMs use transformer architectures comprising hundreds of billions of parameters and trained on massive amounts of textual data
- The effectiveness of LLMs is surprising in three inter-related ways: their performance scales with the size of the training set, there are qualitative leaps in capability as the models scale, and a great many tasks that demand intelligence in humans can be reduced to next token prediction with a sufficiently performant model
- As LLMs become more adept at mimicking human language, we become more vulnerable to anthropomorphism - seeing these systems as more human-like than they really are
- To mitigate this trend, Murray Shanahan advocates for repeatedly stepping back to remind ourselves how LLMs actually work and how they form part of larger systems
- It's important not to overestimate the abilities of LLMs or see them as fully autonomous entities capable of independent thought. Instead, we should view them as tools designed for specific purposes within larger systems that require careful consideration and ethical oversight.
- The paper highlights the need for greater awareness around our use of language when discussing AI technologies like LLMs. By avoiding anthropomorphism and maintaining scientific precision in our discussions, we can foster a more nuanced understanding of these powerful tools while also ensuring responsible development and deployment practices going forward.
Authors: Murray Shanahan
Abstract: Thanks to rapid progress in artificial intelligence, we have entered an era when technology and philosophy intersect in interesting ways. Sitting squarely at the centre of this intersection are large language models (LLMs). The more adept LLMs become at mimicking human language, the more vulnerable we become to anthropomorphism, to seeing the systems in which they are embedded as more human-like than they really are. This trend is amplified by the natural tendency to use philosophically loaded terms, such as "knows", "believes", and "thinks", when describing these systems. To mitigate this trend, this paper advocates the practice of repeatedly stepping back to remind ourselves of how LLMs, and the systems of which they form a part, actually work. The hope is that increased scientific precision will encourage more philosophical nuance in the discourse around artificial intelligence, both within the field and in the public sphere.
Ask questions about this paper to our AI assistant
You can also chat with multiple papers at once here.
Welcome to our AI assistant! Here are some important things to keep in mind:
- The assistant will only answer questions related to this specific paper.
- Please note that this is not a bot for casual chatting.
- If you want the answer in a language other than the language you chose for navigating the website, simply add "TRANSLATE IN LANGUAGE L" at the end of your query (replace "LANGUAGE L" with the language of your choice).
- For example, you could ask "Can you extract the most important aspect of the paper? TRANSLATE IN SPANISH".
- If you want to keep the history of your questions/answers you should create an account.
Assess the quality of the AI-generated content by voting
Why do we need votes?
Votes are used to determine whether we need to re-run our summarizing tools. If the count reaches -10, our tools can be restarted.
Similar papers summarized with our AI tools
Navigate through even more similar papers through atree representation
Look for similar papers (in beta version)
By clicking on the button above, our algorithm will scan all papers in our database to find the closest based on the contents of the full papers and not just on metadata. Please note that it only works for papers that we have generated summaries for and you can rerun it from time to time to get a more accurate result while our database grows.
Disclaimer: The AI-based summarization tool and virtual assistant provided on this website may not always provide accurate and complete summaries or responses. We encourage you to carefully review and evaluate the generated content to ensure its quality and relevance to your needs.