Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 cited by

Eight Things to Know about Large Language Models

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2304.00612 v1 pith:REB3XW2W submitted 2023-04-02 cs.CL cs.AI

Eight Things to Know about Large Language Models

classification cs.CL cs.AI
keywords llmsmanyattentioneightimportantincreasinginvestmentlanguage
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved
0 comments
read the original abstract

The widespread public deployment of large language models (LLMs) in recent months has prompted a wave of new attention and engagement from advocates, policymakers, and scholars from many fields. This attention is a timely response to the many urgent questions that this technology raises, but it can sometimes miss important considerations. This paper surveys the evidence for eight potentially surprising such points: 1. LLMs predictably get more capable with increasing investment, even without targeted innovation. 2. Many important LLM behaviors emerge unpredictably as a byproduct of increasing investment. 3. LLMs often appear to learn and use representations of the outside world. 4. There are no reliable techniques for steering the behavior of LLMs. 5. Experts are not yet able to interpret the inner workings of LLMs. 6. Human performance on a task isn't an upper bound on LLM performance. 7. LLMs need not express the values of their creators nor the values encoded in web text. 8. Brief interactions with LLMs are often misleading.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score.

  1. Evaluating Artificial Intelligence Through a Christian Understanding of Human Flourishing

    cs.AI 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Frontier AI models default to procedural secularism and score 17 points lower on Christian human-flourishing criteria than on pluralistic ones, with a 31-point gap in faith and spirituality.

  2. Large Language Models are not Fair Evaluators

    cs.CL 2023-05 conditional novelty 6.0

    LLMs show strong position bias when scoring model outputs, allowing easy manipulation of rankings, but calibration with multiple evidence, position balancing, and selective human input reduces this bias to better matc...

  3. Trustworthy LLMs: a Survey and Guideline for Evaluating Large Language Models' Alignment

    cs.AI 2023-08 accept novelty 5.0

    Survey organizes LLM trustworthiness into seven categories and 29 sub-categories, measures eight sub-categories on popular models, and finds that more aligned models generally score higher but with varying effectiveness.