this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)
Machine Learning
1 readers
1 users here now
Community Rules:
- Be nice. No offensive behavior, insults or attacks: we encourage a diverse community in which members feel safe and have a voice.
- Make your post clear and comprehensive: posts that lack insight or effort will be removed. (ex: questions which are easily googled)
- Beginner or career related questions go elsewhere. This community is focused in discussion of research and new projects that advance the state-of-the-art.
- Limit self-promotion. Comments and posts should be first and foremost about topics of interest to ML observers and practitioners. Limited self-promotion is tolerated, but the sub is not here as merely a source for free advertisement. Such posts will be removed at the discretion of the mods.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
The “it” in AI models is the dataset.
Maybe it's less about having as many parameters as the human brain, and more about having datasets as rich and diverse as the real world.
It's probably both. In the Chinchilla paper, they showed that for compute-optimal training, the model size and the training dataset size should be proportional.
People talk a lot about datasets being "rich" and "diverse," but I wish they would also mentioned "not full of crap" in the same breath. Whether it be AI or humans, garbage-in, garbage-out still applies. You can have a rich and diverse dataset that teaches AI horrific, terrible ideas and practices.
We know with humans you get a very different effect based on the quality of the teacher and the teaching material, and we know that a bad teacher teaching bad lessons can be even worse than nothing at all. AI isn't really that different.
Was at a big data industry conference yesterday, and one of the big takeaways was that data quality is going to be critical in the age of genAI.
Well people with mutations like megacephaly which is an enlarged brain aren't any smarter and somehow become even dumber because it messes with neuronal density so we know brain size does not correlate to intelligence at all. Animals with bigger brains meaning more neurons then humans aren't smarter at least in theory, scientists could just be using bad benchmarks.