Top
Best
New

Posted by porridgeraisin 3 hours ago

What happens when an LLM never sees material beyond fifth grade?(littlelearner-ll.github.io)
88 points | 56 commentspage 2
wwizo 2 hours ago|
Not sure what I expected, but it's just the training data, not the character. It'd be so cool if such systems had natural curiosity at this checkpoint. Eg:

> Me: "What's semiotic crystallography? > Response: "I don't know, what is it?"

Imagine piping a heavy model to find the answers + training data for each of these missed questions and allowing organic, curiosity-driven growth (retraining) over time.

sillysaurusx 2 hours ago|
It would lose knowledge about existing subjects unless it’s continually retrained on those too. It could help inform the next training dataset though.
ramity 1 hour ago||
Good thoughts here. Forgetting is important, but that's too advanced for modern LLMs.
dash2 2 hours ago||
It’s not quite like a real fifth grader, I guess - more like a fifth grade genius that has read and understood everything in every syllabus.
andai 2 hours ago||
> What is Schrödinger's cat?

> It's a cat that has been misbehavin'!

shermozle 1 hour ago||
You get Fox News?
asalahli 2 hours ago||
https://xkcd.com/2265/
Terr_ 2 hours ago||
Or with a different kind of early: https://www.smbc-comics.com/comic/rise-of-the-machines
throw310822 2 hours ago||
[February 2020]
aetherspawn 2 hours ago||
Not quite, because it knows about quantum entanglement and that’s a little beyond the fifth grade.
aureate 2 hours ago||
> Quantum entanglement is when a person gets caught in two or more ropes that are connected in a special way. This can happen if the ropes cross each other or if one rope wraps around the other.

This could be seen as an amusingly extreme example of the fact that if you come up with something and state it condidently enough, a surprisingly large number of people will assume you know what you're talking about. Presumably, though, you just mistook the unfiltered (trained on the full data) response for the "Little Learner" one.

aetherspawn 2 hours ago||
I read it, but to be honest it sounded plausible after 1 read (I just assumed it used person interchangeably with object, and I have no idea how quantum entanglement works so the rest was confidence signals)
_diyar 2 hours ago||
You didn’t even read the example you’re referencing.
fuzzfactor 2 hours ago||
Eternal youth?
akarshhegde18 1 hour ago||
[dead]
adamya-05 2 hours ago|
i dont know