Executive summary: The term “open source AI” is frequently misused by companies to gain positive perception without meeting the actual criteria for open source, which hinders meaningful discussion about AI governance and regulation.
Key points:
Open source software is clearly defined, but current AI models don’t fit neatly into this definition due to their unique components (architecture, training process, weights).
The Open Source AI Definition (OSAID) is still being developed, so there is no formal definition of “open source AI” yet.
Many prominent AI models (GPT-4, Llama3, Gemma, Mistral, BLOOMZ) claim to be open source but do not meet the criteria, while only a few (Amber, Crystal, OpenELM) can be considered truly open source.
Companies misuse the “open source” label for PR benefits and to lobby for reduced regulations without sacrificing their competitive advantage.
To clarify the space, the author proposes categorizing models as Open Source (per OSAID), Shared Weights (released weights only), Open Release (encompasses both previous categories), and Closed Source.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, andcontact us if you have feedback.
Executive summary: The term “open source AI” is frequently misused by companies to gain positive perception without meeting the actual criteria for open source, which hinders meaningful discussion about AI governance and regulation.
Key points:
Open source software is clearly defined, but current AI models don’t fit neatly into this definition due to their unique components (architecture, training process, weights).
The Open Source AI Definition (OSAID) is still being developed, so there is no formal definition of “open source AI” yet.
Many prominent AI models (GPT-4, Llama3, Gemma, Mistral, BLOOMZ) claim to be open source but do not meet the criteria, while only a few (Amber, Crystal, OpenELM) can be considered truly open source.
Companies misuse the “open source” label for PR benefits and to lobby for reduced regulations without sacrificing their competitive advantage.
To clarify the space, the author proposes categorizing models as Open Source (per OSAID), Shared Weights (released weights only), Open Release (encompasses both previous categories), and Closed Source.
This comment was auto-generated by the EA Forum Team. Feel free to point out issues with this summary by replying to the comment, and contact us if you have feedback.