Yes, I understand that, you are not understanding what I’m describing. I am not talking about taking an average of numerical data. LLMs take something that can be thought of as an “average” of text. It says “given all the text I have seen, and this new text input, what’s the most likely output?” In some numerical contexts the expected value is also an average, LLMs find a similar result, and that is what I am drawing a parallel between here.
you’re saying that LLMs average words, and because it averages words, it can consistently return mathematically accurate averages based on empirical data that was provided to it. does that sum it up?
Are you actually reading my comments? I am categorically NOT saying anything about mathematical averages, as I have said repeatedly. I am saying that what LLMs do is produce something that is akin to a mathematical average, when applied to text. It produces a “most likely” text output. That is all.
The word “average” does not always apply to numbers. You might, in some contexts, describe an “average” response to a survey - e.g. an opinion that would be considered the norm based on that survey. That is what I am describing. Average, as in “typical or usual.”
average is literally a mathematical function. you can’t have an average of anything without math.
think about it. average as in typical or usual to what? what’s the data set? I’ll give you that LLMs can give you a facsimile of an average, but results are so wildly inconsistent that it makes the end result absolutely useless for anything other than “entertainment value”.
LLMs are the 21st century automatons from the 16th century.
behold! it moves and thinks on its own! it’s alive!!
Average is also a word used outside the context of mathematics. Would you make this argument if someone said “I’m average looking”? No, no, you can’t be average looking, because there is no such thing as an average of appearances! Come on.
average as in typical or usual to what? what’s the data set?
The data set is the training set of the LLM. Look I get that you are obviously very against AI, and that’s fine, I don’t really care, but what they do is what I’ve described. It’s not a literal average, no, but its comparable. That is all I have been trying to say.
Average is also a word used outside the context of mathematics. Would you make this argument if someone said “I’m average looking”? No, no, you can’t be average looking, because there is no such thing as an average of appearances! Come on.
average to what?
to average is to compare. to compare you need a set. to have a set you need data.
Yes, I understand that, you are not understanding what I’m describing. I am not talking about taking an average of numerical data. LLMs take something that can be thought of as an “average” of text. It says “given all the text I have seen, and this new text input, what’s the most likely output?” In some numerical contexts the expected value is also an average, LLMs find a similar result, and that is what I am drawing a parallel between here.
let me make sure I understand.
you’re saying that LLMs average words, and because it averages words, it can consistently return mathematically accurate averages based on empirical data that was provided to it. does that sum it up?
Are you actually reading my comments? I am categorically NOT saying anything about mathematical averages, as I have said repeatedly. I am saying that what LLMs do is produce something that is akin to a mathematical average, when applied to text. It produces a “most likely” text output. That is all.
The word “average” does not always apply to numbers. You might, in some contexts, describe an “average” response to a survey - e.g. an opinion that would be considered the norm based on that survey. That is what I am describing. Average, as in “typical or usual.”
average is literally a mathematical function. you can’t have an average of anything without math.
think about it. average as in typical or usual to what? what’s the data set? I’ll give you that LLMs can give you a facsimile of an average, but results are so wildly inconsistent that it makes the end result absolutely useless for anything other than “entertainment value”.
LLMs are the 21st century automatons from the 16th century.
behold! it moves and thinks on its own! it’s alive!!
Average is also a word used outside the context of mathematics. Would you make this argument if someone said “I’m average looking”? No, no, you can’t be average looking, because there is no such thing as an average of appearances! Come on.
The data set is the training set of the LLM. Look I get that you are obviously very against AI, and that’s fine, I don’t really care, but what they do is what I’ve described. It’s not a literal average, no, but its comparable. That is all I have been trying to say.
average to what?
to average is to compare. to compare you need a set. to have a set you need data.
an average is an equilibrium of a set of data.