High Signal Podcasts Evidence ledger
Method
Browse
← Back to evidence

Evidence receipt / uncertainty

Published · transcript-backed

John Schulman: uncertainty

15 May 2024 Dwarkesh Podcast John Schulman (OpenAI Cofounder) — Reasoning, RLHF, & plan for 2027 AGI

“I don’t know if it’s a phase transition but I might expect the same out of models where there might be some capabilities that work at multiple scales.”

— John Schulman

Source trail

Everything needed to verify it.

Speaker
John Schulman
Attribution
Verified speaker
Claim type
uncertainty
Recorded
15 May 2024
Publisher
Dwarkesh Podcast

Transcript context

…Right now these models can work coherently for five minutes. We want them to be able to do tasks that a human would take an hour to do, then a week, then a month, and so forth. To get to each of these benchmarks, is it going to be the case that each one takes 10X more compute, analogous to the current scaling laws for pre-training? Or is it going to be a much more streamlined process of just getting to that point where you're already more sample efficient and you can just go straight to the years of carrying out tasks or something? At a high level, I would agree that longer-horizon tasks are going to require more model intelligence to do well. They are going to be more expensive to train. I'm not sure I would expect a really clean scaling law unless you set it up in a very careful way, or design the experiment in a certain way. There might end up being some phase transitions where once you get to a certain level you can deal with much longer tasks. For example, when people do planning for different timescales, I'm not sure they use completely different mechanisms. We probably use the same mental machinery thinking about one month from now, one year from now, or a hundred years from now. We're not actually doing some kind of reinforcement learning where we need to worry about a discount factor that covers that timescale and so forth. Using language, you can describe all of these different timescales and then you can do things like plan. In the moment you can try to make progress towards your goal, whether it's a month away or 10 years away. I don’t know if it’s a phase transition but I might expect the same out of models where there might be some capabilities that work at multiple scales. Correct me if this is wrong. It seems like you’re implying that right now we have models that are on a per token basis pretty smart. They might be as smart as the smartest humans on a per token basis. The thing that prevents them from being as useful as they could be is that five minutes from now, they're not going to be still writing your code in a way that’s coherent and aligns with your broader goals you have for your project or something. If it's the case that once you start this long-horizon RL training regime it immediately unlocks your ability to be coherent for longer periods of time, should we be predicting something that is human-level as soon as that regime is unlocked? If not, then what is remaining after we can plan for a year and execute projects that take that long?…

Stored transcript either side of the excerpt. The highlighted words are the published quote; the surrounding text is unedited source, never generated.

Search evidence