Yes, the results that LLMs produce are fascinating. Yet there is something 
missing. It could be the grounding that comes from embeddedness in a real 
environment.William James writes in his "Essays in Radical Empiricism":"Most 
thought-paths, it is true, are substitutes for nothing actual; they end outside 
the real world altogether, in wayward fancies, utopias, fictions or mistakes 
[...] The objective nucleus of every man's experience, his own body, is [...] a 
continuous percept; and equally continuous as a percept (though we may be 
inattentive to it) is the material environment of that body, changing by 
gradual transition when the body moves. But the distant parts of the physical 
world are at all times absent from us, and form conceptual objects merely, into 
the perceptual reality of which our life inserts itself at points discrete and 
relatively 
rare."https://brocku.ca/MeadProject/James/James_1912/James_1912_02.html-J.
-------- Original message --------From: Russ Abbott <russ.abb...@gmail.com> 
Date: 5/29/23  8:01 PM  (GMT+01:00) To: Jochen Fromm <j...@cas-group.net> Cc: 
The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee Group <friam@redfish.com> Subject: 
Re: [FRIAM] A distinguishing feature of living entities I saw that Rodney 
Brooks video. He claimed that transformer-based software has no semantic 
content. I think that's an exaggeration. The semantic content is defined by the 
token embeddings. So many of the explanations of token embeddings 
overcomplicate the basic idea. Look up wordToVec and read some of the articles. 
Word-to-Vec was around before transformers. But transformers are based on that 
idea. (One of the keys to transformers is that the embedding space, including 
the features themselves, is generated as part of the training.) The embedding 
of all tokens in the GPT embedding space is the semantics. It's amazing the 
extent to which that idea can be pushed and the results LLMs produce!  -- Russ 
On Mon, May 29, 2023 at 10:13 AM Jochen Fromm <j...@cas-group.net> wrote:Yes, 
Rodney Brooks said something similar. He said "GPTs have no understanding of 
the words they use, no way to connect those words, those symbols, to the real 
world. A robot needs to be connected to the real world and its commands need to 
be coherent with the real world. Classically it is known as the 'symbol 
grounding 
problem""https://rodneybrooks.com/what-will-transformers-transform/One could 
argue that this form of connectedness and embeddedness leads eventually to 
self-awareness. First physical embeddedness, then social embeddedness and 
finally self-awareness1. Physical Embeddedness:Agents who are embedded in a 
physical world are aware of the world and move in it. To be embedded they need 
to be embodied. Embeddedness leads to a grounding and a unique point of 
viewhttps://iep.utm.edu/husspemb/2. Social Embeddedness:Agents who are embedded 
in a world of social actors are aware of other agents in the world and interact 
with themhttps://mitpress.mit.edu/9780262518581/the-new-science-of-the-mind/3. 
Self-Awareness:Agents who are embedded in two worlds, the physical world and 
the world of language become aware that they are actors in a world of social 
actors by creating a link between the embodiment in the physical world (the 
body) and the embodiment in the world of language (the name or I)-J.-------- 
Original message --------From: Russ Abbott <russ.abb...@gmail.com> Date: 
5/29/23  7:08 AM  (GMT+01:00) To: The Friday Morning Applied Complexity Coffee 
Group <friam@redfish.com> Subject: [FRIAM] A distinguishing feature of living 
entities While watching my two little dogs run around our house, it struck me 
that a feature that distinguishes living from non-living entities is the 
apparent effortlessness with which living ones navigate the world. Imagine how 
difficult it would be to build a robot that could navigate the world so 
effortlessly. To make the comparison a bit simpler, imagine how difficult it 
would be to build a robotic cockroach. When I asked ChatGPT whether anyone has 
built a robotic cockroach, it came up with these examples. (I haven't checked 
to see whether these are real projects.)DASH: The Dynamic Autonomous Sprawled 
Hexapod (DASH) robot, developed at the University of California, Berkeley, was 
inspired by the rapid locomotion of cockroaches. It has six legs and can move 
quickly on various terrains using a simple control mechanism.Harvard RoboBee: 
Although not specifically modeled after a cockroach, the Harvard RoboBee 
project aims to develop small, insect-like robots. These tiny flying robots are 
inspired by the mechanics and flight capabilities of insects and demonstrate 
similar agility and maneuverability.iSprawl: The iSprawl robot, developed at 
the University of California, Berkeley, was inspired by cockroaches' ability to 
squeeze through small spaces. It uses a compliant body design and six legs to 
navigate tight and cluttered environments.VelociRoACH: Developed at the 
University of California, Berkeley, the VelociRoACH is a fast-running robot 
designed to mimic the high-speed locomotion of cockroaches. It utilizes a 
legged design and has demonstrated impressive speed and agility.These mainly 
explore locomotion. Besides locomotion, cockroaches notice when someone enters 
an area where they are exposed. They quickly scuttle off to some hiding place. 
How do they sense the presence of a new being? How do they know where the 
hiding places are? How do they know how to move in the right direction? How do 
they know how to avoid small obstacles and fires? Etc. One can argue that these 
capabilities are hard-wired in. But that doesn't make it any easier. These are 
still capabilities they have, that would be a challenge to build.I became 
amazed at how well-connected living entities are to their environments. They 
quickly and easily extract and use information from their environment that is 
important to their survival. Man-made robots have nowhere near that level of 
embeddedness and environmental integration. Was it Rodney Brooks who said that 
we should build that sort of connectedness before worrying about building 
intelligence into our robots? Today that struck me as an important insight.  -- 
Russ Abbott                                       Professor Emeritus, Computer 
ScienceCalifornia State University, Los Angeles

-. --- - / ...- .- .-.. .. -.. / -- --- .-. ... . / -.-. --- -.. .
FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv
Fridays 9a-12p Friday St. Johns Cafe   /   Thursdays 9a-12p Zoom 
https://bit.ly/virtualfriam
to (un)subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com
FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/
archives:  5/2017 thru present https://redfish.com/pipermail/friam_redfish.com/
  1/2003 thru 6/2021  http://friam.383.s1.nabble.com/

Reply via email to