Empirical Findings Generalize Surprisingly Far
Previously, I argued that emergent phenomena in machine learning mean that we can't rely on current trends to predict what the future of ML will be like. In this post, I will argue that despite this, empirical findings often do generalize very far, including across "phase transitions" caused
Previously, I argued that emergent phenomena in machine learning mean that we can't rely on current trends to predict what the future of ML will be like. In this post, I will argue that despite this, empirical findings often do generalize very far, including across "phase transitions" caused by emergent behavior. This might seem like a contradiction, but actually I think divergence from current trends and empirical generalization are consistent. Findings do often generalize, but you need to think to determine the right generalization, and also about what might stop any given generalization fro
Explore this link on the map →related reading
- Future ML Systems Will Be Qualitatively Differentbounded-regret.ghost.io
- Just Ask for Generalization | Eric Jangevjang.com
- Alignment remains a hard, unsolved problem — LessWronglesswrong.com
- Clare Lyle | What's grokking good for?clarelyle.com
- Future ML Systems Will Be Qualitatively Different — LessWronglesswrong.com
- Unfalsifiable stories of doom | Mechanize, Inc.mechanize.work
- Core views on AI safety: When, why, what, and how \ Anthropicanthropic.com
- Thought Experiments Provide a Third Anchorbounded-regret.ghost.io
- Generalization Dynamics of LM Pre-training — Jiaxin Wenjiaxin-wen.github.io
- Core views on AI safety: When, why, what, and how \ Anthropicanthropic.com
- Dario Amodei — "We are near the end of the exponential"dwarkesh.com
- Model Organisms for Emergent Misalignment — LessWronglesswrong.com