Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by pingou 12 days ago
Yet LLMs can play chess and have a "mental" representation of the chessboard.

If LLMs get better but do not progress at playing games when not specifically trained on it it seems to point to a generalisation failure, a limitation that would prevent LLMs to ever achieve AGI, I do not know if that is weird but it seems that for now nobody really knows if they can achieve AGI or not. Perhaps some emergent behavior will arise after more scaling.

To me it's only totally unsurprising if you are 100% certain that LLMs will never reach AGI (like LeCun thinks for example).

1 comments

Chess games are in their training set, other games are not.
Chess is representable entirely in text as well, and generally speaking the LLM concept of "picking the next best token" fits pretty well for "picking the next best move" where a move is a text token
That representation is also old, incredibly well documented, and used to describe how to reason about chess. There are of course text guides to other games in training data but they rely upon depictions of what’s happening that aren’t purely text so the game harness is always going to have to make novel decisions about represent the game as text.