undefined | Better HN

0 pointsKoolKat231y ago0 comments

All Kahneman's system 2 thinking is just slow deliberate thinking. And these models do indeed have this characteristic to an extent, as evidenced with chain of thought reasoning.

You can see this in action with multiplication. Much like humans when asked to guess the answer, they'll get it wrong, unless they know the answer from rote learning multiplication tables, this System-1 thinking. In many cases when asked they can reason further and solve it, by breaking it down and solving it step by step, much like a human, this is system-2 thinking.

In my opinion, it seems nearly everything is there for it it to take the next leap in intelligence, it's just putting it all together.

0 comments

dogcomplex1y ago

Agreed. System 2 strategizing may simply be the recursive application of symbolic System 1 tooling. An LLM is entirely capable of reading a problem, determining the immediate facts and tokens (fast and intuitive system 1) and determining the ideal algorithm to resolve them (logical analytical system 2). The execution to do all those steps at once is lacking in current LLMs (debatably - they get better every month) - but any basic architecture breaking things down into component sub-questions clearly works.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 pointsKoolKat231y ago0 comments

All Kahneman's system 2 thinking is just slow deliberate thinking. And these models do indeed have this characteristic to an extent, as evidenced with chain of thought reasoning.

In my opinion, it seems nearly everything is there for it it to take the next leap in intelligence, it's just putting it all together.

0 comments

dogcomplex1y ago

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse