Stochastic LLMs do not Understand Language: Towards Symbolic, Explainable and Ontologically Based LLMs
(2309.05918)Abstract
In our opinion the exuberance surrounding the relative success of data-driven LLMs is slightly misguided and for several reasons (i) LLMs cannot be relied upon for factual information since for LLMs all ingested text (factual or non-factual) was created equal; (ii) due to their subsymbolic na-ture, whatever 'knowledge' these models acquire about language will always be buried in billions of microfeatures (weights), none of which is meaningful on its own; and (iii) LLMs will often fail to make the correct inferences in several linguistic contexts (e.g., nominal compounds, copredication, quantifier scope ambi-guities, intensional contexts. Since we believe the relative success of data-driven LLMs is not a reflection on the symbolic vs. subsymbol-ic debate but a reflection on applying the successful strategy of a bottom-up reverse engineering of language at scale, we suggest in this paper applying the effective bottom-up strategy in a symbolic setting resulting in symbolic, explainable, and ontologically grounded language models.
We're not able to analyze this paper right now due to high demand.
Please check back later (sorry!).
Generate a summary of this paper on our Pro plan:
We ran into a problem analyzing this paper.