Source URL: https://apple.slashdot.org/story/24/10/13/2145256/study-done-by-apple-ai-scientists-proves-llms-have-no-ability-to-reason?utm_source=rss1.0mainlinkanon&utm_medium=feed
Source: Slashdot
Title: Study Done By Apple AI Scientists Proves LLMs Have No Ability to Reason
Feedly Summary:
AI Summary and Description: Yes
Summary: A recent study by Apple’s AI scientists reveals significant weaknesses in the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs), such as those developed by OpenAI and Meta. The introduction of a new benchmark, GSM-Symbolic, aims to assess and address the inconsistencies seen in LLMs when minor alterations to queries yield drastically different answers.
Detailed Description:
The study conducted by Apple’s research team highlights critical vulnerabilities in LLMs, raising concerns about their ability to perform reliable reasoning tasks. The ongoing development and deployment of AI-powered systems necessitate careful evaluation of their operational integrity, particularly in sensitive applications. Key findings from the study include:
– **Benchmark Proposal**: The researchers introduced a new benchmark, GSM-Symbolic, aimed at measuring the reasoning competencies of various LLMs. This is pivotal for future AI assessments, especially in understanding and improving AI reasoning.
– **Fragility of Responses**: The study reveals that even minor changes in the phrasing of queries can lead to significantly different answers from LLMs. More specifically, the results demonstrate that adjusting wording or adding seemingly relevant context can skew the accuracy of mathematical solutions dramatically.
– **Quantitative Findings**: It was determined that adding an additional sentence could lower the accuracy of the response by up to 65%, indicating a critical issue in the models’ solidity and dependency on superficial cues rather than real reasoning capabilities.
– **Conclusion on Reasoning Abilities**: The research concludes that LLMs currently operate more as sophisticated pattern matchers rather than true reasoning agents. The study asserts that there is no evidence to suggest formal reasoning abilities exist within these models, highlighting an urgent need for improvement.
– **Implications for AI Applications**: As organizations leverage LLMs in various applications, the fragility identified poses risks, particularly in domains where precise reasoning is paramount, such as in financial analysis or legal contexts.
This study carries substantial implications for AI development, especially pertaining to the trustworthiness and reliability of systems that utilize LLMs. It emphasizes the necessity for enhanced evaluation metrics in AI engineering that go beyond current testing frameworks, paving the way for developments that may ultimately contribute to more stable and reliable AI-driven solutions.