[Terr_]

Invert the question: Within loose concepts of pattern-finding, what isn't the "same shape"? Does the similarity actually tell us anything useful, or is it true in the unhelpful sense Apples and Oranges are equivalent because they're both made of atoms?

Disagreement aside, there's some [dead] going on here which doesn't have an obvious cause.

[audriusber]

That’s a fair challenge.

My intuition is that the interesting similarity isn’t “parameters plus an algorithm,” but the fact that in both cases a large body of observations is replaced by a smaller generative structure capable of making predictions.

We group apples and oranges together not because they are both made of atoms, but because they share enough structure and function that we call them fruits. My intuition is that scientific laws and LLMs share more than just a computational substrate—they both act as predictive compressions of large bodies of observations.

Do you think that similarity is still too generic, or is there a more fundamental difference between scientific laws and LLMs that I’m overlooking?

One quick question: what do you mean by the “[dead]” part? Are you referring to the article link itself or to something in the argument?