[ma2rten]

I didn't have time to read this, but it is a single author paper, the author is not affiliated with a research group, it is not peer reviewed, it was published on a preprint server that I have never heard of.

LLMs can definitely perform some kinds of reasoning. For example GSM8K is a dataset of grade school math problem requiring reasoning that LLMs are typically evaluated at. We talk about one method for this in our chain of thought paper [1]

[1] https://arxiv.org/abs/2201.11903

[ramblerman]

> I didn't have time to read this

You had time to respond though, what a silly (and elitist rebuttal).

OP is arguing from a philosophical point of view that GPT-4 can not reason, i.e. is just repeating/parroting on trained logical arguments.

You argue by authority that yes, it actually does reason, which is a far (far) bolder claim than the one OP is making.

[adamsmith143]

>You had time to respond though, what a silly (and elitist rebuttal).

What a dumb take. It probably takes seconds to write a simple comment and far longer to read a paper.

>You argue by authority that yes, it actually does reason, which is a far (far) bolder claim than the one OP is making.

He linked a paper you can read yourself. How is this arguing from authority?