Sorry, I think you’re reading me as saying something like “language models scaled naively up don’t do anything superhuman”? Whereas I’m trying to say something more like “language models scaled naively up break the trend line in the vicinity of human level, because the basic mechanism for improved capabilities that they had been using stops working, so they need to use other mechanisms (which probably move a bit slower)”.
If you disagree with that unpacking, I’m interested to hear it. If you agree with the unpacking and think that I’ve done a bad job summarizing it, I’m interested if you want to propose alternate wording.
I do discuss the stuff you’re talking about in several places in the doc, especially Sections 2.3, 4.1, and 6.2.
Sorry, I think you’re reading me as saying something like “language models scaled naively up don’t do anything superhuman”? Whereas I’m trying to say something more like “language models scaled naively up break the trend line in the vicinity of human level, because the basic mechanism for improved capabilities that they had been using stops working, so they need to use other mechanisms (which probably move a bit slower)”.
If you disagree with that unpacking, I’m interested to hear it. If you agree with the unpacking and think that I’ve done a bad job summarizing it, I’m interested if you want to propose alternate wording.
I do discuss the stuff you’re talking about in several places in the doc, especially Sections 2.3, 4.1, and 6.2.