The figure also shows that the non LLM algorithm from 2012 was as capable or more capable than a human: was it as intelligent as a well educated human?

If not, why is the study sufficient evidence for the LLM, but not sufficient evidence for the previous system?

Again, it feels like statistical methods are winning out in general.

> Perhaps it’s better that you ask a statistician you trust

Maybe we can shortcut this conversation by each of us simply consulting O1 :^)