Search (4 results, page 1 of 1)

  • × language_ss:"e"
  • × theme_ss:"Computerlinguistik"
  • × year_i:[2020 TO 2030}
  1. Noever, D.; Ciolino, M.: ¬The Turing deception (2022) 0.08 
    0.07795914 = product of:
  0.31183657 = sum of:
    0.31183657 = weight(_text_:3a in 862) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.31183657 = score(doc=862,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.55485153 = queryWeight, product of:
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06544595 = queryNorm
        0.56201804 = fieldWeight in 862, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          8.478011 = idf(docFreq=24, maxDocs=44218)
          0.046875 = fieldNorm(doc=862)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Source
    https%3A%2F%2Farxiv.org%2Fabs%2F2212.06721&usg=AOvVaw3i_9pZm9y_dQWoHi6uv0EN
  2. Jha, A.: Why GPT-4 isn't all it's cracked up to be (2023) 0.02 
    0.01787368 = product of:
  0.07149472 = sum of:
    0.07149472 = weight(_text_:objects in 923) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07149472 = score(doc=923,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.34784988 = queryWeight, product of:
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06544595 = queryNorm
        0.20553327 = fieldWeight in 923, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          5.315071 = idf(docFreq=590, maxDocs=44218)
          0.02734375 = fieldNorm(doc=923)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Abstract
    They might appear intelligent, but LLMs are nothing of the sort. They don't understand the meanings of the words they are using, nor the concepts expressed within the sentences they create. When asked how to bring a cow back to life, earlier versions of ChatGPT, for example, which ran on a souped-up version of GPT-3, would confidently provide a list of instructions. So-called hallucinations like this happen because language models have no concept of what a "cow" is or that "death" is a non-reversible state of being. LLMs do not have minds that can think about objects in the world and how they relate to each other. All they "know" is how likely it is that some sets of words will follow other sets of words, having calculated those probabilities from their training data. To make sense of all this, I spoke with Gary Marcus, an emeritus professor of psychology and neural science at New York University, for "Babbage", our science and technology podcast. Last year, as the world was transfixed by the sudden appearance of ChatGPT, he made some fascinating predictions about GPT-4.
  3. Morris, V.: Automated language identification of bibliographic resources (2020) 0.02 
    0.017734047 = product of:
  0.07093619 = sum of:
    0.07093619 = weight(_text_:22 in 5749) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.07093619 = score(doc=5749,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22918057 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06544595 = queryNorm
        0.30952093 = fieldWeight in 5749, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0625 = fieldNorm(doc=5749)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    2. 3.2020 19:04:22
  4. Luo, L.; Ju, J.; Li, Y.-F.; Haffari, G.; Xiong, B.; Pan, S.: ChatRule: mining logical rules with large language models for knowledge graph reasoning (2023) 0.01 
    0.011083779 = product of:
  0.044335116 = sum of:
    0.044335116 = weight(_text_:22 in 1171) [ClassicSimilarity], result of:
      0.044335116 = score(doc=1171,freq=2.0), product of:
        0.22918057 = queryWeight, product of:
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.06544595 = queryNorm
        0.19345059 = fieldWeight in 1171, product of:
          1.4142135 = tf(freq=2.0), with freq of:
            2.0 = termFreq=2.0
          3.5018296 = idf(docFreq=3622, maxDocs=44218)
          0.0390625 = fieldNorm(doc=1171)
  0.25 = coord(1/4)
    Date
    23.11.2023 19:07:22

Authors

Types