Show Notes
What makes a satisfying explanation? Understanding and prediction are two different goals at odds with one another — think fundamental physics versus artificial neural networks — and even what defines a “simple” explanation varies from one person to another. Held in a kind of ecosystemic balance, these diverse approaches to seeking knowledge keep each other honest…but the use of one kind of knowledge to the exclusion of all others leads to disastrous results. And in the 21st Century, the difference between good and bad explanations determines how society adapts as rapid change transforms the world most people took for granted — and sends humankind into the epistemic wilds to find new stories that will help us navigate this brave new world. This week we dive deep with SFI External Professor Simon DeDeo at Carnegie Mellon University to explore his research into intelligence and the search for understanding, bringing computational techniques to bear on the history of science, information processing at the scale of society, and how digital technologies and the coronavirus pandemic challenge humankind to think more carefully about the meaning that we seek, here on the edge of chaos… If you value our research and communication efforts, please subscribe to Complexity Podcast wherever you listen, rate and review us at Apple Podcasts, and/or consider making a donation at santafe.edu/engage. Thank you for listening! Join our Facebook discussion group to meet like minds and talk about each episode. Podcast theme music by Mitch Mignano. Follow us on social media: Twitter • YouTube • Facebook • Instagram • LinkedIn Works Discussed: “From Probability to Consilience: How Explanatory Values Implement Bayesian Reasoning” Zachary Wojtowicz & Simon DeDeo (+ SFI press release on this paper) “Supertheories and Consilience from Alchemy to Electromagnetism” Simon DeDeo (SFI lecture video) “From equality to hierarchy” Simon DeDeo & Elizabeth Hobson The Complex Alternative: Complexity Scientists on the COVID-19 Pandemic SFI Press (with “From Virus to Symptom” by Simon DeDeo) “Boredom and Flow: An Opportunity Cost Theory of Attention-Directing Motivational States” Zachary Wojtowicz, Nick Chater, & George Loewenstein “Scale and information-processing thresholds in Holocene social evolution” Jaeweon Shin, Michael Holton Price, David H. Wolpert, Hajime Shimao, Brendan Tracey, & Timothy A. Kohler “Slowed canonical progress in large fields of science” Johan Chu and James Evans “Will A Large Complex System Be Stable?” Robert May Related Podcast Episodes: • Andy Dobson on Disease Ecology & Conservation Strategy • Nicole Creanza on Cultural Evolution in Humans & Songbirds • On Coronavirus, Crisis, and Creative Opportunity with David Krakauer • Carl Bergstrom & Jevin West on Calling Bullshit: The Art of Skepticism in a Data-Driven World • Vicky Yang & Henrik Olsson on Political Polling & Polarization: How We Make Decisions & Identities • David Wolpert on The No Free Lunch Theorems and Why They Undermine The Scientific Method • Science in The Time of COVID: Michael Lachmann & Sam Scarpino on Lessons from The Pandemic • Jonas Dalege on The Physics of Attitudes & Beliefs • Tyler Marghetis on Breakdowns & Breakthroughs: Critical Transitions in Jazz & Mathematics Mentioned: David Spergel, Zachary Wojtowicz, Stuart Kauffman, Jessica Flack, Thomas Bayes, Claude Shannon, Sean M. Carroll, Dan Sperber, David Krakauer, Marten Scheffer, David Deutsch, Jaewon Shin, Stuart Firestein, Bob May, Peter Turchin, David Hume, Jimmy Wales, Tyler Marghetis
More from COMPLEXITY
In the final episode of the season, Abha sits down with Melanie to hear her perspective. They chat about Melanie’s career and research with Douglas Hofstadter, the author of Gödel, Escher, Bach. They also discuss her opinions on LLMs’ current capabilities, what she thinks of existential questions like the alignment problem, how sustainable the industry is, the difficulty of making claims about concepts like “intelligence” and “understanding,” and what she thinks future technological development should focus on.
When it comes to assessing intelligence, people have all kinds of tests — the SAT, IQ tests, and so on. There’s controversy over how fairly these tests really measure human intelligence, but at the very least, we know that they correlate with some general reasoning skills when people take them. That assumption breaks down when we try to assess intelligence in non-humans. What does it mean when a large language model passes an intelligence test meant for humans? Does it actually have the same reasoning skills that a human does, or is it doing something else? In today’s episode, with guests Erica Cartmill and Ellie Pavlick, we investigate the best ways to assess intelligence in non-humans, whether animals or machines.
There’s an argument to be made that if we train AI systems to learn the way babies do, we’ll get them closer to human-like intelligence. But how our own learning development functions in babyhood is still a mystery that researchers are untangling. We know that the information babies absorb is very different from how an LLM learns, and in today’s episode, with guests Linda Smith and Michael Frank we’ll attempt to look at the world through an infant’s eyes and examine why they’re able to do more with, seemingly, less information.
Large language models, like ChatGPT and Claude, have remarkably coherent communication skills. Yet, what this says about their “intelligence” isn’t clear. Is it possible that they could arrive at the same level of intelligence as humans without taking the same evolutionary or learning path to get there? Or, if they’re not on a path to human-level intelligence, where are they now and where will they end up? In this episode, with guests Tomer Ullman and Murray Shanahan, we look at how large language models function and examine differing views on how sophisticated they are and where they might be going.
Complex language is unique to the human species. It’s part of how we evolved, the backbone of our societies, and one of the primary ways we judge others’ intellect. Is it our intelligence that leads to our language abilities, or conversely, does our ability for language enhance our intelligence, or both? How do language and thinking interact? And can one exist without the other? Guests: Evelina Federenko, Steve Piantadosi, and Gary Lupyan.