Skip to content
  • Kategorien
  • Aktuell
  • Tags
  • Beliebt
  • World
  • Benutzer
  • Gruppen
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Standard: (Kein Skin)
  • Kein Skin
Einklappen

other.li Forum

  1. Übersicht
  2. Uncategorized
  3. Researchers just mathematically proved that AI can't recursively self-improve its way to superintelligence.

Researchers just mathematically proved that AI can't recursively self-improve its way to superintelligence.

Geplant Angeheftet Gesperrt Verschoben Uncategorized
machinelearningllmresearch
160 Beiträge 77 Kommentatoren 0 Aufrufe
  • Älteste zuerst
  • Neuste zuerst
  • Meiste Stimmen
Antworten
  • In einem neuen Thema antworten
Anmelden zum Antworten
Dieses Thema wurde gelöscht. Nur Nutzer mit entsprechenden Rechten können es sehen.
  • ? Gast

    @resuna

    I'm sorry, did I hurt your feels by pointing out that you're choosing emotions over facts?

    @devsimsek

    ? Offline
    ? Offline
    Gast
    schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
    #119

    @troed @devsimsek

    I'm not going to respond to abuse with my own abuse, no matter how tempted I am.

    ? 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
    0
    • devsimsek@universeodon.comD devsimsek@universeodon.com

      Researchers just mathematically proved that AI can't recursively self-improve its way to superintelligence.

      Not "we think it's unlikely." Not "it seems hard." Formally proved.

      The model doesn't climb toward AGI — it slowly forgets what reality looks like. They call it model collapse. The math calls it inevitable.
      I wrote about it 👇

      https://smsk.dev/2026/04/26/ai-cannot-self-improve-and-math-behind-proves-it/

      #AI #MachineLearning #LLM #Research

      ? Offline
      ? Offline
      Gast
      schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
      #120

      @devsimsek Hi,
      I just wanted to ask what the difference between this and fitting a simple regression model on predicted outcomes? I feel the conclusions of this study is pretty obvious even from a simple regression case - or is it not? Why would we expect something different from LLMs?

      devsimsek@universeodon.comD 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
      0
      • ? Gast

        @troed @devsimsek

        I'm not going to respond to abuse with my own abuse, no matter how tempted I am.

        ? Offline
        ? Offline
        Gast
        schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
        #121

        @resuna

        This is "abuse":

        "anything else is hallucinated by the researchers fooled by [...]"

        Don't debate subjects you don't understand. Your initial post to me is laughably ignorant and directly contradicted by science:

        "[LLMs] do not build models or reason about them"

        @devsimsek

        ? 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
        0
        • ? Gast

          @resuna

          This is "abuse":

          "anything else is hallucinated by the researchers fooled by [...]"

          Don't debate subjects you don't understand. Your initial post to me is laughably ignorant and directly contradicted by science:

          "[LLMs] do not build models or reason about them"

          @devsimsek

          ? Offline
          ? Offline
          Gast
          schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
          #122

          @troed @devsimsek

          What? I didn't even mention or refer to you in the text you quoted.

          ? 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
          0
          • ? Gast

            @troed @devsimsek

            What? I didn't even mention or refer to you in the text you quoted.

            ? Offline
            ? Offline
            Gast
            schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
            #123

            @resuna

            Why do you think abuse of others is ok?

            @devsimsek

            1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
            0
            • ? Offline
              ? Offline
              Gast
              schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
              #124

              @resuna

              Yeah sorry, that doesn't qualify as a loaded question. If you want to play Debate then you need to understand the rules.

              @devsimsek

              1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
              0
              • ? Gast

                @devsimsek Hi,
                I just wanted to ask what the difference between this and fitting a simple regression model on predicted outcomes? I feel the conclusions of this study is pretty obvious even from a simple regression case - or is it not? Why would we expect something different from LLMs?

                devsimsek@universeodon.comD This user is from outside of this forum
                devsimsek@universeodon.comD This user is from outside of this forum
                devsimsek@universeodon.com
                schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                #125

                @drmambobob hi 🙂
                Before I reply completely you must know that I'm not an expert on this topic but just a curious guy.

                You made a great remark, it is essentially the same problem scaled up. The obvi part is that you cannot get something from nothing. The main reason I assume the paper authors are talking about it differently with llms is that while a regression model just gets stale, olm goes probabilistic hell. It basically actively deletes its output diversity until it produces a single acceptable response.

                I hope this answers your question.

                1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                0
                • devsimsek@universeodon.comD devsimsek@universeodon.com

                  Researchers just mathematically proved that AI can't recursively self-improve its way to superintelligence.

                  Not "we think it's unlikely." Not "it seems hard." Formally proved.

                  The model doesn't climb toward AGI — it slowly forgets what reality looks like. They call it model collapse. The math calls it inevitable.
                  I wrote about it 👇

                  https://smsk.dev/2026/04/26/ai-cannot-self-improve-and-math-behind-proves-it/

                  #AI #MachineLearning #LLM #Research

                  ? Offline
                  ? Offline
                  Gast
                  schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                  #126

                  @devsimsek 👍

                  1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                  0
                  • devsimsek@universeodon.comD devsimsek@universeodon.com

                    Researchers just mathematically proved that AI can't recursively self-improve its way to superintelligence.

                    Not "we think it's unlikely." Not "it seems hard." Formally proved.

                    The model doesn't climb toward AGI — it slowly forgets what reality looks like. They call it model collapse. The math calls it inevitable.
                    I wrote about it 👇

                    https://smsk.dev/2026/04/26/ai-cannot-self-improve-and-math-behind-proves-it/

                    #AI #MachineLearning #LLM #Research

                    ? Offline
                    ? Offline
                    Gast
                    schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                    #127

                    @devsimsek I am the farthest thing from a mathematician but just from a general lay persons perspective the thesis seems a little rigid. Assuming all training data outside the internet is corrupt, assuming that synthetic data only comes from recursive souring, etc. I don't really want to cheerlead AGI as I assume it will bring about a bunch of existential risk but I'm still in the "wouldn't bet against it" camp.

                    devsimsek@universeodon.comD 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                    0
                    • ? Gast

                      @drwho

                      You forgot the '/s' indicator 😉.

                      ? Offline
                      ? Offline
                      Gast
                      schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                      #128

                      @paulschoe

                      1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                      0
                      • ? Gast

                        @devsimsek I am the farthest thing from a mathematician but just from a general lay persons perspective the thesis seems a little rigid. Assuming all training data outside the internet is corrupt, assuming that synthetic data only comes from recursive souring, etc. I don't really want to cheerlead AGI as I assume it will bring about a bunch of existential risk but I'm still in the "wouldn't bet against it" camp.

                        devsimsek@universeodon.comD This user is from outside of this forum
                        devsimsek@universeodon.comD This user is from outside of this forum
                        devsimsek@universeodon.com
                        schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                        #129

                        @mike Yeah I see your pov. I just made some remarks and some of them were satirical which you can obviously see through my writing style. I do agree with your stance on rigidity.

                        Also thanks for the comment 🙂 I hope you have enjoyed scrolling through those gifs 🙂

                        ? ? 2 Antworten Letzte Antwort
                        0
                        • devsimsek@universeodon.comD devsimsek@universeodon.com

                          @mike Yeah I see your pov. I just made some remarks and some of them were satirical which you can obviously see through my writing style. I do agree with your stance on rigidity.

                          Also thanks for the comment 🙂 I hope you have enjoyed scrolling through those gifs 🙂

                          ? Offline
                          ? Offline
                          Gast
                          schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                          #130

                          @devsimsek Forgive me as I digress. Even though I left Twitter years ago whenever I even mildly challenge someone on social media I still "brace for impact" after I press send. It's so refreshing to get a polite and coherent response that resembles civil discourse. Mastodon still amazes me.

                          devsimsek@universeodon.comD 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                          0
                          • devsimsek@universeodon.comD devsimsek@universeodon.com

                            @mike Yeah I see your pov. I just made some remarks and some of them were satirical which you can obviously see through my writing style. I do agree with your stance on rigidity.

                            Also thanks for the comment 🙂 I hope you have enjoyed scrolling through those gifs 🙂

                            ? Offline
                            ? Offline
                            Gast
                            schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                            #131

                            @devsimsek @mike I have a vague feeling that there's an argument to be made that a model that can train itself which is then given continuous IO from/to the world (vision, hearing, touch, voice, body) might be able to evolve into a self-sustaining intelligent entity, as long as it has to work for its survival (i.e. work for its input energy).

                            devsimsek@universeodon.comD 2 Antworten Letzte Antwort
                            0
                            • ? Gast

                              @devsimsek @mike I have a vague feeling that there's an argument to be made that a model that can train itself which is then given continuous IO from/to the world (vision, hearing, touch, voice, body) might be able to evolve into a self-sustaining intelligent entity, as long as it has to work for its survival (i.e. work for its input energy).

                              devsimsek@universeodon.comD This user is from outside of this forum
                              devsimsek@universeodon.comD This user is from outside of this forum
                              devsimsek@universeodon.com
                              schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                              #132

                              @virtuous_sloth @mike On a personal belief I don't think so but this must be tried or at least done an experiment.

                              I believe someone out there are currently working on it 🙂

                              ? 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                              0
                              • devsimsek@universeodon.comD devsimsek@universeodon.com

                                @virtuous_sloth @mike On a personal belief I don't think so but this must be tried or at least done an experiment.

                                I believe someone out there are currently working on it 🙂

                                ? Offline
                                ? Offline
                                Gast
                                schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                                #133

                                @devsimsek @mike I certainly don't think we are anywhere near it nor will we be until someone invents a silicon nerve (simple multiple-input binary output tunable arbitrary functional nerves) that uses very little energy instead of simulated (via linear algebra on GPUs) ones.

                                ? 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                                0
                                • ? Gast

                                  @devsimsek Forgive me as I digress. Even though I left Twitter years ago whenever I even mildly challenge someone on social media I still "brace for impact" after I press send. It's so refreshing to get a polite and coherent response that resembles civil discourse. Mastodon still amazes me.

                                  devsimsek@universeodon.comD This user is from outside of this forum
                                  devsimsek@universeodon.comD This user is from outside of this forum
                                  devsimsek@universeodon.com
                                  schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                                  #134

                                  @mike always, I am open for feedback that's how I learn at least 🙂

                                  Also similar thing happened on reddit; someone called my blog post ai generated, I told them nope its all written by me and they apologized. That's not normal 🙂 At least not according to my experience 🙂

                                  1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                                  0
                                  • ? Gast

                                    @devsimsek @mike I have a vague feeling that there's an argument to be made that a model that can train itself which is then given continuous IO from/to the world (vision, hearing, touch, voice, body) might be able to evolve into a self-sustaining intelligent entity, as long as it has to work for its survival (i.e. work for its input energy).

                                    devsimsek@universeodon.comD This user is from outside of this forum
                                    devsimsek@universeodon.comD This user is from outside of this forum
                                    devsimsek@universeodon.com
                                    schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                                    #135

                                    @virtuous_sloth @mike well that sounds intriguing 🙂

                                    1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                                    0
                                    • ? Gast

                                      @devsimsek @mike I certainly don't think we are anywhere near it nor will we be until someone invents a silicon nerve (simple multiple-input binary output tunable arbitrary functional nerves) that uses very little energy instead of simulated (via linear algebra on GPUs) ones.

                                      ? Offline
                                      ? Offline
                                      Gast
                                      schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                                      #136

                                      @virtuous_sloth @devsimsek There is a technology that is using light pathways to create an "Analog" GPU which is showing some promise.

                                      ? 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                                      0
                                      • ? Gast

                                        @virtuous_sloth @devsimsek There is a technology that is using light pathways to create an "Analog" GPU which is showing some promise.

                                        ? Offline
                                        ? Offline
                                        Gast
                                        schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                                        #137

                                        @mike @devsimsek Interesting.

                                        Also confusing since GPUs are currently being used to do massively-parallel floating-point arithmetic as part of the matrix-matrix and matrix-vector math involved in the linear algebra of the models, and there's not much analog about that I am aware of. I do know that simple resister, capacity, & inductor circuits are analog representations of 2nd-order differential equations, but not sure how that would apply here.
                                        /shrug/

                                        ? 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                                        0
                                        • ? Gast

                                          @mike @devsimsek Interesting.

                                          Also confusing since GPUs are currently being used to do massively-parallel floating-point arithmetic as part of the matrix-matrix and matrix-vector math involved in the linear algebra of the models, and there's not much analog about that I am aware of. I do know that simple resister, capacity, & inductor circuits are analog representations of 2nd-order differential equations, but not sure how that would apply here.
                                          /shrug/

                                          ? Offline
                                          ? Offline
                                          Gast
                                          schrieb am zuletzt editiert von
                                          #138

                                          @virtuous_sloth @devsimsek This is the company, however there's not much on their web site. I believe I saw a youtube video explaining its operation. The gist was that the major roadblock was analog to digital conversion to utilize memory. Apologies my memory of the details is vague. https://qant.com/photonic-computing/

                                          ? 1 Antwort Letzte Antwort
                                          0
                                          Antworten
                                          • In einem neuen Thema antworten
                                          Anmelden zum Antworten
                                          • Älteste zuerst
                                          • Neuste zuerst
                                          • Meiste Stimmen


                                          • Anmelden

                                          • Anmelden oder registrieren, um zu suchen
                                          • Erster Beitrag
                                            Letzter Beitrag
                                          0
                                          • Kategorien
                                          • Aktuell
                                          • Tags
                                          • Beliebt
                                          • World
                                          • Benutzer
                                          • Gruppen