[anonymouskimmer]

> Humans are nearly all mimics, at least 98%+. They are LLMs.

We are GIs, at least 98%+, LLM like behavior may exist in our cognitive repertoire, but we certainly aren't limited to it. Can an LLM drive locomotion?

I never understood AGI as generating sui generis ideas as a requirement. I thought that AGIs could also be uncreative mimics.

[dragonwriter]

> Can an LLM drive locomotion?

Can't see any principled reason it couldn't, if it was a big enough, sufficiently trained one, running on fast-enough hardware, if you represent the sensor data in its token vocabulary, and have the reverse for control outputs.

Quite probably not the most efficient way to drive locomotion, though.

> I never understood AGI as generating sui generis ideas as a requirement.

Creativity is among the applications of intelligence that I would deem included in the "G" in AGI; OTOH, like most proposed binary categories, its probably more useful to view generality as a matter of degree than a crisp binary attribute.

[fennecfoxy]

>Can an LLM drive locomotion

If it's been trained to, but I'm not sure that's been the focus recently, though I think some research has been done into it. Turns out prediction engines with attention are useful for more than just predicting text; our bodies and brains work on learned assumptions and behaviours.

But certainly I imagine transformer + attention can = learning to walk/perform task. LLM specifically no...because it's trained on language and not motion, it's all in the name. But even then perhaps motion can be turned into language (non English tokens tho) & an LLM still used, I know people are working on funky stuff like that as well.

[anonymouskimmer]

It's basically the question of Turing machines and universal calculation. As a lay person I just wouldn't expect an LLM to be good at intelligences using other than sequential symbols.