Evidence receipt / evaluation
Published · transcript-backedTrenton Bricken: evaluation
28 Mar 2024 Dwarkesh Podcast Sholto Douglas & Trenton Bricken — How LLMs actually think
“My one gripe–I guess I have two gripes with this though, maybe three. So in the AlphaFold paper, one of the transformer modules–they have a few and the architecture is very intricate–but they do, I think, five forward passes through it and will gradually refine their solution as a result.”
Source trail
Everything needed to verify it.
- Speaker
- Trenton Bricken
- Attribution
- Verified speaker
- Claim type
- evaluation
- Recorded
- 28 Mar 2024
- Publisher
- Dwarkesh Podcast
Transcript context
…This is actually an interesting point. So when we talk about scaling up these models, how much of it comes from just making the models themselves bigger? And how much comes from the fact that during any single call you are using more compute? So if you think of diffusion, you can just iteratively keep adding more compute. If adaptive compute is solved, you can keep doing that. And in this case, if there's a quadratic penalty for attention but you're doing long context anyways, then you're still dumping in more compute ( and not just by having bigger models). It's interesting because you do get more forward passes by having more tokens. My one gripe–I guess I have two gripes with this though, maybe three. So in the AlphaFold paper, one of the transformer modules–they have a few and the architecture is very intricate–but they do, I think, five forward passes through it and will gradually refine their solution as a result. You can also kind of think of the residual stream, Sholto alluded to the read-write operations, as a poor man's adaptive compute. Where it's just going to give you all these layers and if you want to use them, great. If you don't, then that's also fine. Then people will be like, “oh the brain is recurrent and you can do however many loops through it you want.” I think to a certain extent, that's right. If I ask you a hard question, you'll spend more time thinking about it and that would correspond to more forward passes. But I think there's a finite number of forward passes that you can do. It’s with language as well, people are like “oh human language can have infinite recursion in it,” like infinite nested statements of “the boy jumped over the bear, that was doing this, that had done this, that had done that…” But empirically, you'll only see five to seven levels of recursion, which relates to that magic number of how many things you can hold in working memory at any given time. So it's not infinitely recursive, but does that matter in the regime of human intelligence? And can you not just add more layers? Can you break it down for me? You've referred to this in some of your previous answers of listening to these long contexts and holding more things in memory. But ultimately it comes down to your ability to mix concepts together to do some kind of reasoning and these models aren't necessarily human level at that, even in context. Break down for me how you see just storing raw information versus reasoning and what's in between. Like, where's the reasoning happening? Where is this raw information storage happening? What's different between them in these models?…
Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.