[antisthenes]

World modeling is impossible without sensory input.

You need constant modeling of touch/smell/vision/temperature, etc.

These senses give us an actual understanding of the physical world and drive our behavior in a way that pure language will never be able to.

[stevenhuang]

A facsimile of sufficient equivalence to the world models we derive from our 5 senses may be approached through derivation of descriptive language only.

"sufficient equivalence" is important because sure it may not _really_ know the color of red or the qualia of being, but if for all intents and purposes the LLM's internal model provides predictive power and answers correctly as if it does have a world model, then what is the difference?

[esafak]

That's not how physics works. We understand the world by interacting with it. How do you know your internal model is right until it is tested in reality?

[thewataccount]

Yeah but we can serialize the world to numbers and already have.

I asked GPT3.5turbo "Pretend you are a character called Samatha and you're in your house. You go up to the thermostat and select a comfortable temperature and explained your reasoning"

> Next, I take into account my personal preferences and comfort levels. Everyone has their own ideal temperature range, and it's essential to find the sweet spot that makes me feel most comfortable. For me, it's usually between 22 to 24 degrees Celsius (72 to 75 degrees Fahrenheit). This range allows me to feel neither too cold nor too warm, striking the perfect balance.

It also goes on about how the humidity could effect the desired temperature, etc.

It doesn't need the ability to feel temperature (which could also be a single floating number using kelvin), but it can already describe a "comfortable temperature" and what factors would effect it.

Side note: It doesn't "know" anything, it can only make a "best guess" which is now fairly reliable enough to be useful. It doesn't need the ability to test things to learn, we did it already for it, and it's using that to predict the results. You could make a recursive system to allow it to test data if you'd like though.

[stevenhuang]

Seems you're unaware the amount of world knowledge that already exist in written form.

Think of all the top journals, textbooks, etc. People have understood the world by interacting with it, detailed their hypothesis, conducted experiments, recalled their learning and written down conclusions.

It's not at all obvious to say a useful world model cannot be derived strictly from all this written information.