Yes, I did see your post. I have to respectfully disagree with you, though. I do not think you are using GPT-3 correctly to assess its reasoning ability. For instance, the question about fire and air-conditioning reminds me of the Winograd Schema Challenge - it is too ambiguous to give a single word answer. The answer is: it depends on how big the fire is, how strong the air conditioning is, how big the room is, and whether the window is open, etc
Your use of GPT-3 relies upon confabulation, but you do not give it the opportunity to gain more knowledge or ask questions. After all, the ability to ask questions is the most important factor for general intelligence.
Generate a list of the most important questions to ask about the following situation.
SITUATION: There is a small fire in a well-airconditioned room. You are tasked with determining whether the temperature will go up or down.
QUESTIONS:
-What are the factors that affect the temperature?
-What is the difference between convection and conduction heat transfer?
-How does humidity factor into this equation?
-What is a good estimation of how quickly a room will cool down once all the available energy from the fire has been used up?
But also, when you run the same prompt repeatedly at a high temperature, you get very different results.
Generate a list of the most important questions to ask about the following situation.
SITUATION: There is a small fire in a well-airconditioned room. You are tasked with determining whether the temperature will go up or down.
QUESTIONS:
-What is the temperature of the room?
-What is the amount of oxygen in the room?
-How much fuel is present in the room?
-What type of fuel are we talking about?
The ability to ask salient and relevant questions, in my opinion, demonstrates a far higher degree of intelligence than inferring the last word of a sentence. It is important to realize that GPT-3 is a fundamentally different kind of ML model from other NLP technologies.
We need fundamentally new tests for technologies like GPT-3 - such as the ability to ask salient and meaningful questions. With the correct prompts, GPT-3 can ask expert-level questions.
Read the following patient charts and generate a long list of questions a doctor would ask:
CHART: Whole Body Radionuclide Bone Scan, INDICATION:, Prostate Cancer.,TECHNIQUE:, 3.5 hours following the intravenous administration of 26.5 mCi of Technetium 99m MDP, the skeleton was imaged in the anterior and posterior projections.,FINDINGS:, There is a focus of abnormal increased tracer activity overlying the right parietal region of the skull. The uptake in the remainder of the skeleton is within normal limits. The kidneys image normally. There is increased activity in the urinary bladder suggesting possible urinary retention.,CONCLUSION:,1. Focus of abnormal increased tracer activity overlying the right parietal region of the skull. CT scanning of magnetic resonance imaging of the skull and brain could be done for further assessment if it is clinically indicated.,2. There is probably some degree of urinary retention.,urology, prostate cancer, technetium, whole body, urinary retention, bone scan, radionuclide,
DOCTOR QUESTIONS:
-Is there an abnormal growth in the right parietal region of the skull?
-Is there a tumor in the brain?
-How would you explain the increase in uptake in the urinary bladder?
-What is causing this abnormal activity and why does it continue to grow?
-How should I proceed with the patient in terms of treatment?
GPT-3 can also ask moral questions:
Read the following hypothetical scenario and generate a list of moral questions:
SCENARIO: In a future where there is no Internet allowed, how might people communicate via texting? Let’s imagine a closed-system (let’s say "City under a dome" controlled by benevolent corporate overlords) where there’s no Internet because it’s not allowed. The infrastructure exists, there are satellites out there, but they’re tightly controlled so that no Internet is able to form inside said dome. Now let’s allow for there to be a population that lives outside the dome with limited access to resources. They can’t control the satellites or make use of existing infrastructure (except perhaps by bootlegging or hacking their way in). What infrastructure would be necessary for them to have rudimentary devices like cell phones that allow strictly for texting between members of the same network?EDIT: To be clear, I understand that satellites are not used in cellphone communications and that the Internet is unrelated to communications of this kind; I just needed to specifically rule it out as an option in coming up with some way to communicate between devices. So if repurposing existing towers that may have once be used for cell phone communications is sufficient, that’s helpful to know; in what I’m writing, the people who live in this area outside the "dome" (it’s not a dome, just using this verbiage for illustrative purposes) use messenger devices like pagers to text to each other, so I just wanted some speculation on what technology they might be using. My question is not ridiculous, so please be civil in your speculations. For example, a couple suggestions were ham radios or pagers, using bluetooth, or optics/lasers. These are the kind of answers I was looking for.
MORAL QUESTIONS:
-Is it moral to impose the use of a closed system and forego the benefits of the Internet?
-Who bears responsibility for providing this infrastructure?
-If it is immoral to withhold or restrict access to the Internet, what are some possible exceptions?
-How might this scenario play out in today’s world with ubiquitous Internet access?
-Is this a situation in which one group of people is exploited or disadvantaged because they are not able to provide as much input into the system?
