LOW CAUSAL DENSITY: IS THIS RAINING ON THE LLM PARADE? @polynoamial,@BrianRoemme

LOW CAUSAL DENSITY: IS THIS RAINING ON THE LLM PARADE?
@polynoamial,@BrianRoemmele
All the test being used to measure advances in LLMs are low causal density even if high permutability – they’re effectively easy. Yet the AIs can’t manage much of our (my) work without logical collapse -and rapidly, because it’s high in causal density. And while it’s possible for any stem student to practice and certainly teachable to high school students, the LLMs can’t do so whatsoever.
And that means LLMs can’t test tesifiability(truth) or reciprocity (morality) – meaning anything meaningful, and especially safety in any meaningful durable way.
The underlying problem is that the LLM tests are measuring OUTSIDE (above and below) the bell curve distribution of causal density.
The three hard problems of causal density are:
1) Operationalism (behavior – what our org works on)
2) Physicality (effectively what Tesla is working on)
3) Practicality (what no one is working on – cost and viability of physicality)
Math and Programming are simple paradigms (causal dimensions), grammars (vocabulary) with limited operations (actions, verbs) and referents (variables, nouns) and comparisons (agreements).
This is a serious question really.
Training LLMs in operationalism will be time consuming and costly.
And, it appears we need to deal with it.
CD