Many people think any given ML project is 99% training.
In reality, it’s 50% evaluation, 40% data cleaning, 8% integration, and 2% training.
The first two set the noise floor for learning. No ML magic matters; the model cannot lower the noise floor, as that’s the optimal bound of Shannon encoding of your data.
Thus, not a single day goes by without me thinking about ontology. Even the old labels have to be constantly reviewed.
@DimitrisPapail Cool stuff! I think the challenge would be even more interesting with a scaling law num parameters versus number of digits (at iso ~100% accuracy)
Genie 3 🤝 @Waymo
The Waymo World Model generates photorealistic, interactive environments to train autonomous vehicles.
This helps the cars navigate rare, unpredictable events before encountering them in reality. 🧵
I find that LLMs went much further than I initially thought 3-4 years ago. My impression is that pretraining enables many non trivial things to work, that would never otherwise (test-time "thinking", rlhf, fine-tuning on non trivial targets, interaction with tools etc). Am I the only one to be positively surprised?
If you pass a sequence of constant tokens to a transformer with rotary encodings, it will return a constant output distribution, because the attention values are constant. Idk if someone spotted this "bug" before?
Interesting effect, I think I saw you mentioned it in one of your tweet indeed. Yes my point is that ultimately even with cot, the model must be pretrained on a sufficiently large context length L, that contains at most L*log2(vocab_size) bits. That's enough to solve most problems, but that's still a hard limit.
@DimitrisPapail Your work is still interesting for sure, but what I mean is that it doesn't solve the fundamental problem of the transformer architecture, which is that you must train it with a large enough context window.
@DimitrisPapail I mean you could train with a longer context window yes, with even just some fine-tuning. But testing with a longer context window experimentally doesn't work, it's what people have been struggling with for a long time (i.e. length generalization).
@nouhadziri@DimitrisPapail It also makes me think about universality: is it really the right concept? Couldn't we get, say, a proof of the RH in a few years, with a model that can't sum and add two numbers?
Here you know you should pull up the logit of the class you proposed when you get +1 and push it down with -1, but that's it. You have to "poke around" until you get a +1.
So in the classification setup you get ~log_2(N) bits of information, and in the RL case 1 bit.
4/4