# ChatGPT is a funny guy

The guy is a pathological liar

In my view, is just a word2vec on steroids. Is prone to just produce utter trash, when the terms are remotely close.

The Trough of Disillusionment will be substantial

I wonder what is a recursive adder.

A recursive adder is a real thing and it solves real problems in massively parallel hardware.
Parallel Algorithms, Lecturer: Guy Blelloch, Date: Jan 13, 2009; see page 2.

Reference 2 is about a symposium that did happen, and it is about very closely related topics, but the named author and actual paper are not listed in the proceedings. Some of the papers could well include vector adders.
https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/xpl/conhome/8457441/proceeding?isnumber=8457615&sortType=vol-only-seq&rowsPerPage=75&pageNumber=1

Reference 3 is weird. The named authors did write an important book about computer architecture in the named year, and it does have details of vector operations that are similar to what is called out in the reference, but the actual book does not have any naming similarity to the stated reference.

Itâ€™s like ChatGPT is flailing around the topic it is talking about but the stated facts are not necessarily strictly tied to all of the related facts so it fills in/fabricates the â€śrestâ€ť of an answer.

ChatGPT knows stuff, it knows where in the training text the answer material can be found, and what an answer with the requested facts would look like, but past that, there is a good deal of poetic license.

2 Likes

Is it incentivized to be truthful?

1 Like

I am reminded of the old saying, garbage in equals garbage out

2 Likes

Does â€śattention is all you needâ€ť likely qualify?

1 Like

Everything is made up. The problem is that it seems okay at first glance. I think the problem is that as soon as two terms have some common components in word2vec (just because they appear in certain text), it starts to invent. Since the invention is based on actual information, it looks okay. The main problem is that it is not able to say â€śdonâ€™t knowâ€ť.

PS: If the terms in word2vec have zero components in common (i.e., vector units based on cats), he successfully said that there is no way to find information.

2 Likes

It has been severals years, Iâ€™m still looking for practical MachineLearning models able to tell its (accurate) confidence level comparable to other ML agentsâ€™, then I could choose the most confident individuals (out of an ML agent population) for each actual decision, as an online strategy.

Intelligence is what you use when you donâ€™t know what to do: when neither innateness nor learning has prepared you for the particular situation.

Jean Piaget

3 Likes

I think these two parts are overlooked (or at least under appreciated) by ML community in its pursuit for intelligent machine

About confidence - at a basic level, in a classifier the ratio between first and second top choices is a good indicator of confidence. Meaning that for e.g. MNIST there would be 11 valid answers - â€ś0â€ť,â€¦,â€ś9â€ť and â€śnot sureâ€ť. And even if the classifier says â€śnot sureâ€ť 80% of times, it is still very useful that when if pronounces a digit it is 99.9% certain about it.

The only requirement is the classifier algorithm to be one that outputs a vector of scores for each class like linear regression or MLP classifier. In ensembles (e.g. random forests, MoE-s) tight voting scores or each expert voting a choice multiplied with its own confidence level should be useful.
A more complicated approach could be to train an explicit classifier or regression to score the modelâ€™s confidence. Iâ€™m not sure how effective would that be.

Regarding what to do when it doesnâ€™t know what to do. To start, it needs some sense of self doubt. This is very useful because gives it an indication on what (kind of) data to use in further training. It has the potential to improve sample efficiency of the training.

I personally think (well, currently this is my working belief) is that a very small part of the brain/cortex/minicolumns knows stuff adding up to a â€śknown realityâ€ť. The vast majority are holding millions (billions?) of potential clues on past experiences which might provide useful correlations next time the human/animal doesnâ€™t know what to do.

2 Likes

I initially assumed thatâ€™s a â€śfirst thingâ€ť to come first, from an architectâ€™s perspective, and disappointed to find out, maybe this first thing can only come last, if it will eventually come at all.

Rare people have a good sense about it. Though I can be perfectly okay with such an ML agent population (i.e. everyone be a bigot of its own knowledge), only if I can have some metrics about who can be trusted upon certain things, something like godâ€™s wisdom?

I think the influence can be even much bigger than that,

I imagine to feed cherry-picked data per each agentâ€™s inclination, making them even more inclined, as an online strategy. I expect better fitting individuals per each specific situation, not averaged morons thinking the same about everything.

Then the real challenge may turn out to be: choosing different crowds of paranoids in solving sudden situations.

1 Like

Thatâ€™s an old cycle of ideas and hypotheses very closely related to XAI. Bottom line, the idea was the probabilities of a model directly dictate confidence. But turned out, the model was overconfident about wrong answers.

Then the idea came to fix that, but our cost functions donâ€™t incorporate that very well or notions of truth without damaging the convexity of the loss landscape. Now, RLHF and other stuff is the rage.

This problem that youâ€™ve defined is AI Aligment, and its insanely hard. But the counterargument is that we donâ€™t need to solve it. Rather, we need an agent that is able to improve and learn if its told that the information is wrong.

Doubt it.

Thatâ€™s an extreme oversimplification. Rather, it deduced from the question the general areas where that topic might be suited based on some little information. It knew that HTM is supposed to be efficient and an AI like system, so assumed that it had capabilities like DL hence the ASR and scaled-up models (â€śAchieves competitive performance compared to traditional ASR systemsâ€ť)

You can read up an interesting (non-technical) blogpost about how LMs are closer to simulators more than anything: Simulators - LessWrong

1 Like

I hope you use the feedback button to submit your concerns about the accuracy of the answers.
This really is early days for this class of chatbots and they will get better as the developers continue to tweak the models.

My concern is the authentic sounding call out of fictitious papers and authors.

I find ChatGPT to be a very useful study aid but I also make a habit of accessing the papers or standards that it offers. I do usually ask for reference papers as I explore topics. It is pretty good on naming the correct section and paragraph of standards. The information is very useful on mainstream concepts that you might find on Kahn academy, less so on obscure technical papers. That said, the named authors and conferences are usually on point even if it gets the details wrong.

As far a â€śdepthâ€ť when exploring a topic, it seems to be a better than a typical wiki entry, not as good as a monograph by a knowledgeable expert like Murray Sherman offers on the thalamus.

On balance, my experiences with ChatGPT have been more positive than negative and I eagarly look forward to the tools that will sprout from this class of software.

1 Like

ah, I feel I badly phrased my reply. It sounds like Iâ€™m countering how its simply fuzzily retrieving text. Rather, what Iâ€™m countering is that its not just some arbitrary `word2vec` dimensions (well for one, 256 dims is absolutely nothing) but rather it learns circuits and algorithms to perform its tasks.

At the end of the day its still modelling surface level text and has no way to tell truth apart (A similarity shared by right-wing extremists) because its not incentivized to do so. Its objective is to model natural language. So simply on text alone, youâ€™d never get even close to understanding of truth.

Ideally, we want to break out. Humans model the entire world, not just a single specific modality. To ground it in the real world, weâ€™d need to train it on the realworld. After all, language evolved to express concepts in the real world, not the other way around.

Its also why progress in transformers applying to other domains is so useful, and why attention was truly a breakthrough @vpuente. Its a single architecture that works with anything you throw at it - text, image, video, RL trajectories, arbitrary sequences of amino acids, games etc. or a combination of any of the above. No architecture exhibits that.

1 Like

Mark
Do you fabricate information if you donâ€™t know it, such as the authors of a paper?

No, as an AI language model, I donâ€™t fabricate information. If I donâ€™t know the answer to a question, I will simply say that I donâ€™t know or that the information is not available in my knowledge base. However, I am constantly learning and updating my knowledge base, so if the information is available in a reliable source, I will do my best to provide an accurate and up-to-date answer.

Regarding the authors of a paper, I can usually provide the information if it is available in my knowledge base. However, if the information is not available, I will let you know that I donâ€™t know the answer or that the information is not available.
Mark
How about the contents of a paper? Do you always attribute a fact to the correct source text?

As an AI language model, I always strive to provide accurate and reliable information, including attributing facts to their correct source text. However, since I rely on a large knowledge base, which is created and maintained by a variety of sources, itâ€™s possible that some inaccuracies or mistakes may occur.

In general, I try to provide information that is supported by reputable sources and to accurately attribute any quotes or information to their original sources. However, itâ€™s important to note that Iâ€™m a machine learning model and not a human being, so my ability to accurately attribute information to specific sources depends on the quality and accuracy of the data I have been trained on.

If you notice any inaccuracies or errors in the information I provide, please let me know so that I can work to correct them.
Mark
Are you familiar with multi-operand recursive addition?

As an AI language model, I am familiar with the concept of recursive addition, which involves breaking a larger addition problem down into smaller subproblems that are easier to solve. However, Iâ€™m not sure what you mean by â€śmulti-operandâ€ť recursive addition.

In general, recursive addition can be used to add two or more numbers by breaking the problem down into smaller subproblems. For example, to add the numbers 3, 5, and 7, you could break the problem down into the following subproblems:

3 + 5 + 7
= (3 + 5) + 7
= 8 + 7
= 15

This is an example of using recursive addition with three operands. However, Iâ€™m not sure if this is what you were referring to. If you can provide more information or context about â€śmulti-operandâ€ť recursive addition, I may be able to provide a more specific answer.
Mark
Do you know any papers by arman sazanami?

Iâ€™m sorry, but I donâ€™t have any information in my database about a researcher or author named Arman Sazanami. Itâ€™s possible that this person is a relatively unknown or emerging researcher, or that they have not published any papers in areas covered by my training data.

If you have any additional information about the context in which you encountered the name Arman Sazanami, or any specific topics or fields that they are associated with, I may be able to help you further. Alternatively, you can try searching online academic databases or other resources to see if any papers by this author are available.
Mark

I was able to find a paper titled â€śHigh-Speed Recursive Adders for Vector Processingâ€ť by Seong-Ook Jung and In-Cheol Park, which was published in the Journal of the Institute of Electronics and Information Engineers in 1993.

This paper describes a method for implementing high-speed recursive adders for vector processing applications, which can improve the performance of vector processors by reducing the number of clock cycles required for vector addition. The authors propose a recursive adder structure that can perform vector addition with a single clock cycle per element, using a carry-save adder and a carry-propagate adder.

If this is the paper you were looking for, I hope this information is helpful. Let me know if you have any further questions!
Mark
is there any similar paper published in the proceedings of the IEEE 2018 FCCM symposium?

Iâ€™m not sure if there is a similar paper published in the proceedings of the IEEE 2018 FCCM Symposium, as there are many papers that are published in conference proceedings and it can be difficult to identify a specific paper based on a general topic.

However, I can suggest some ways to search for papers that might be relevant. One option is to use a search engine such as Google Scholar or the IEEE Xplore Digital Library to search for papers related to high-speed recursive adders or vector processing. You can then filter the search results to only include papers that were published in the IEEE 2018 FCCM Symposium.

Another option is to look through the list of papers that were published in the proceedings of the IEEE 2018 FCCM Symposium and see if any titles or authors stand out as potentially related to the topic of high-speed recursive adders or vector processing.

I hope this helps! Let me know if you have any other questions or if there is anything else I can help you with.
Mark
How about the same topic by the authors Tim Pinkston and John Hennessy?

I was unable to find a paper on the topic of â€śhigh-speed recursive adders for vector processingâ€ť published by Tim Pinkston and John Hennessy in the proceedings of the IEEE 2018 FCCM Symposium. However, itâ€™s possible that they may have published a paper on a similar topic in a different conference or journal.

Tim Pinkston is a computer science professor at the University of Southern California, and John Hennessy is a computer science professor at Stanford University and a former president of Stanford. Both are highly regarded researchers in the field of computer architecture and have made significant contributions to the development of high-performance computing systems.

If you have any additional information or context that might help me narrow down the search for a paper by these authors, please let me know and Iâ€™ll do my best to assist you. Alternatively, you can try searching online academic databases or contacting the authors directly to see if they have published any papers on this topic.
Mark
Anything on the the same topic by the named authors in the year 1990?

I couldnâ€™t find any papers specifically on the topic of â€śhigh-speed recursive adders for vector processingâ€ť by Tim Pinkston and John Hennessy in the year 1990. However, both authors have made significant contributions to the field of computer architecture and have published numerous papers on related topics.

In particular, John Hennessy is well-known for his work on RISC processors and computer architecture, and he co-authored a seminal textbook on computer organization and design. Tim Pinkston has also worked on computer architecture and has published papers on topics such as high-performance memory systems and parallel processing.

Itâ€™s possible that they may have published papers related to the topic of high-speed recursive adders or vector processing in the early 1990s, but without more specific information or context itâ€™s difficult to know for sure. If you have any additional information or context that might help narrow down the search, please let me know and Iâ€™ll do my best to assist you.

The named journal and article is in Japanese so I was not able to confirm the the â€śâ€śHigh-Speed Recursive Adders for Vector Processingâ€ť by Seong-Ook Jung and In-Cheol Parkâ€ť
I did mention the Pinkston and Hennessy textbook above and included a link.
Itâ€™s like a Jeckel and Hyde thing.

1 Like

Way down the ChatGPT rabbit hole!
A perfect example of the Dunning-Kruger effect - donâ€™t know what you donâ€™t know so you plow on as if you did know something!

Mark
Can you recommend any papers about creating an ASR (automatic speech recognition) system using HTM?

Hierarchical Temporal Memory (HTM) is a computational framework for building intelligent systems that can learn from streaming data in a way that is similar to how the human brain works. While HTM has been successfully applied to various applications, including image and text recognition, there are relatively few papers that explore using HTM for automatic speech recognition (ASR). However, here are a few resources that you may find helpful:

``````"Speech Recognition Using Hierarchical Temporal Memory" by Subutai Ahmad and Numenta (2017). This paper describes an experiment in which HTM was used to recognize spoken digits (0-9) using a dataset from the Speech Commands dataset. The authors compare their HTM-based approach to a deep learning-based approach and report promising results.

"An HTM-based Approach to Continuous Speech Recognition" by Gerald Tesauro, Subutai Ahmad, and Yuwei Cui (2018). This paper presents an HTM-based approach to continuous speech recognition, which is the task of transcribing spoken language into text. The authors use a modified version of the HTM algorithm to process the speech signal, and report results that are comparable to other state-of-the-art ASR systems.

"A Speech Recognition System Using Hierarchical Temporal Memory and Deep Learning" by Arindam Basu, Avik Samanta, and Sankar Kumar Pal (2019). This paper proposes a hybrid approach to ASR that combines HTM with deep learning techniques. The authors use HTM to preprocess the speech signal and extract features, and then use a deep learning model to perform the actual recognition. The authors report improved accuracy compared to a purely deep learning-based approach.
``````

While the use of HTM for ASR is still a relatively new area of research, these papers provide a good starting point for exploring the topic.
Mark
I am unable to find the paper by Subutai.

I apologize for the confusion. The paper I mentioned in my previous response titled â€śSpeech Recognition Using Hierarchical Temporal Memoryâ€ť was actually presented by Jeff Hawkins, Numenta co-founder, at the IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech, and Signal Processing (ICASSP) in 2017. Here is a link to the paper:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/315965867_Speech_Recognition_Using_Hierarchical_Temporal_Memory

I hope this helps!
Mark

I apologize for the inconvenience. Unfortunately, it seems that the original link I provided is no longer working. Here is an alternative link where you can access the paper:

https://www.numenta.com/resources/papers/speech-recognition-using-htm

I hope this helps!
Mark

I apologize for the inconvenience. It appears that the paper may no longer be available on the Numenta website. However, I was able to find a copy of the paper on the arXiv preprint server. Here is the link to the paper:

I hope this helps!
Mark
Nope - that link goes to a paper titled â€śExploiting Color Name Space for Salient Object Detectionâ€ť

I apologize for the confusion. It appears that there was a mistake in my previous response. Here is the correct link to the paper â€śSpeech Recognition Using Hierarchical Temporal Memoryâ€ť by Jeff Hawkins, Subutai Ahmad, and Yuwei Cui:

I hope this helps!
Mark
That link goes to a paper titled â€śDiscriminative recurring signal detection and localizationâ€ť

I apologize for the confusion. It appears that there was another mistake in my previous response. Here is another link to the paper â€śSpeech Recognition Using Hierarchical Temporal Memoryâ€ť by Jeff Hawkins, Subutai Ahmad, and Yuwei Cui:

I hope this link works for you!
Mark

I apologize again for the inconvenience. Here is another link to the paper â€śSpeech Recognition Using Hierarchical Temporal Memoryâ€ť by Jeff Hawkins, Subutai Ahmad, and Yuwei Cui:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1877050918307647

I hope this link works for you!
Mark

I apologize for the confusion and the inconvenience caused. Here is the correct link to the paper â€śSpeech Recognition Using Hierarchical Temporal Memoryâ€ť by Jeff Hawkins, Subutai Ahmad, and Yuwei Cui:

https://numenta.com/resources/papers/speech-recognition-using-htm/

This link should take you directly to the paper on the Numenta website.

Again, I apologize for the errors in my previous responses, and I hope this link works for you.
Mark

I apologize for the confusion and inconvenience. Unfortunately, it seems that the paper â€śSpeech Recognition Using Hierarchical Temporal Memoryâ€ť by Jeff Hawkins, Subutai Ahmad, and Yuwei Cui is not available on the Numenta website anymore. However, you can still access the paper on the arXiv preprint server through the following link:

Once again, I apologize for any confusion or inconvenience caused by my previous responses, and I hope this link works for you.
Mark
Feedback: Please examine this exchange - ChatGPT is offering bogus links and the claim that Numenta (As far as I know) has worked on speech recognition is utterly false.

I apologize for the confusion and inconvenience caused by my previous responses. It appears that there was a mistake in my understanding of the topic, and I provided incorrect links. Thank you for bringing this to my attention.

You are correct that Numenta has not specifically worked on speech recognition, and I apologize for my error. As a language model, my knowledge is based on the data I was trained on, and I try my best to provide helpful responses based on that data. However, I can make mistakes, and I appreciate your feedback in helping me to correct those mistakes and improve my responses.

Again, I apologize for any confusion or inconvenience caused, and I will do my best to avoid such errors in the future.

3 Likes

Also, I suspect it assumes it knows what it knows, which is neither true.

I wonder how it defines â€śreliableâ€ť regarding its sources, e.g. Google has Page-Rank expanding from a simple idea, but limited to per web pages, how does ChatGPT do it?

2 Likes

The funny thing is when you tell it that a correct answer is wrong, ChatGPT apologizes the same way and changes the answer.

As Groucho Marx put it:

3 Likes

Reminds me of Eliza

2 Likes

But thatâ€™s not as bad as it is portrayed when falsely assumed it should be an oracle of truth. It isnâ€™t.
It can not cross check the facts it states. Our brains would not handle it better if they were missing early age real-world interactions.

What is interesting is despite that, useful truth is often there buried in between false or irrelevant statements.

So there is potential to increase a LLMâ€™s reliability if/when weâ€™ll be able to supply it (or it will be able to find) sufficient stable points of â€śirrefutable realityâ€ť.

If you think etymologically understanding means standing on solid ground.

2 Likes