logoalt Hacker News

abernard1yesterday at 10:18 AM1 replyview on HN

I think this is actually a perfect case of an impressive thing being done exactly by mimicry.

Why do LLMs still have trouble on floating point math without forking out to a tool, but they can perform symbolic manipulation just fine?

Because symbolic manipulation is just rote work and textual stepping through symbols. A side poster commented on the number of prior attempts on this problem which were close, but not quite.

Starting from a known "close" solution (which this did), and using exploration to search around the space is exactly something an LLM would and could be good at (clearly).

The "transformer LLMs are next-token predictors with some in-GPU processing of bounded complexity with respect to token count" remains undefeated. Both because that is mathematically what they are, and also because we don't have counterexamples to that effect that don't require some higher-order tooling wrapping the systems.

Symbol manipulation is what LLMs are good at.


Replies

cornholioyesterday at 1:09 PM

The field now favors into the view that symbolic manipulation is not the mechanism of general intelligence, but rather an emergent byproduct of learning. So the fact that a connectionist machine (neural network) got so good at symbolic manipulation actually supports the view that we are closing the gap to general intelligence. Through the rote work, the machine really internalizes those rules and the symbolic manipulation capabilities are emergent, just like we humans do it.

What still confuses people is the insane inefficiency of deep learning, and that those emergent capabilities require such an immense training corpus compared to the only other architecture that we know of.

But this already is an optimization problem. If the machine gets super human at symbolic reasoning, and at the same time, can solve the symbol grounding problem to real world data and sensors, what prevents you from saying it thinks? Can it not solve real world problems? Can it not redefine its tasks and display some form moral agency - even if a totally foreign morality for us humans? Can it not use these abilities to reproduce and expand, create ships and turn the universe into paperclips, if it finds it worthwhile?

Math is basically just a playground that is perfectly suited for these emergent capabilities, so of course we will see the first progress here; but there is no firewall separating math problems from general cognition.

show 1 reply