Marcus 的质疑戳中了 AI 推理评估的软肋——做 AI 研究或评测的人，需要思考如何区分真正的推理与模仿，避免被表面正确的结果误导。
Gary Marcus 在 X 上发文，质疑 Dwarkesh Patel 关于 AI 推理的论述。Marcus 指出，如果承认 LLM 在无法回答问题时可能模仿推理而非真正推理，那么当模型回答正确时，也应考虑同样的可能性，否则就是双重标准。这场辩论触及 AI 推理本质的核心问题，引发学界和业界对如何定义和验证 AI 推理能力的讨论。
what constitutes reasoning in AI is a critical debate. i hope that @dwarkesh_sp will respond.
what constitutes reasoning in AI is a critical debate. i hope that @dwarkesh_sp will respond. Gary Marcus @GaryMarcus what does this even mean, @dwarkesh_sp , “the real deal”? is it even a falsifiable conjecture? what’s the evidence? and if you can agree that “If you ask an LLM a question it can't answer, sometimes it will just try to imitate reasoning without doing it”, why acknowledge the possibility of imitation when it gets wrong but not when it gets it right? seems like a double standard? 🔗 View Quoted Tweet 💬 0 🔄 0 ❤️ 2 👀 221 ⚡