> To effectively predict the next token it needs a good idea of what comes after the next token.
And that's all it needs. Not reasoning.
At some level of performance reasoning becomes the most effective method to predict the next token
Isn't "reasoning" in LLMs just training it to have an internal monologue to think through problems like a human would? i.e. extra tokens.
Save us from the reasoning / sentience / consciousness / thinking semantic quicksand.
Babbage’s Analytical Engine didn’t actually analyze anything, and terminology hadn’t gotten any more clear-cut since.