Comment by dmurray
1 year ago
This seems quite likely to me, but did they special case it by reinforcement training it into the LLM (which would be extremely interesting in how they did it and what its internal representation looks like) or is it just that when you make an API call to OpenAI, the machine on the other end is not just a zillion-parameter LLM but also runs an instance of Stockfish?
That's easy to test, invent a new chess variant and see how the model does.
You're imagining LLMs don't just regurgitate and recombine things they already know from things they have seen before. A new variant would not be in the dataset so would not be understood. In fact this is quite a good way to show LLMs are NOT thinking or understanding anything in the way we understand it.
Yes, that's how you can really tell if the model is doing real thinking and not recombinating things. If it can correctly play a novel game, then it's doing more than that.
12 replies →
You say this quite confidently, but LLMs do generalize somewhat.
In both scenarios it would perform poorly on that.
If the chess specialization was done through reinforcement learning, that's not going to transfer to your new variant, any more than access to Stockfish would help it.
Both an LLM and Stockfish would fail that test.
Nobody is claiming that Stockfish is learning generalizable concepts that can one day meaningfully replace people in value creating work.
2 replies →