The ability to abstract, count, and use System 2 reasoning are well-known manifestations of intelligence and understanding. In this paper, we argue, using the example of the ``Look and Say" puzzle, that although deep neural networks can exhibit high `competence' (as measured by accuracy) when trained on large data sets (2M examples in our case), they do not show any sign on the deeper understanding of the problem, or what D. Dennett calls `comprehension'. We report on two sets experiments on the ``Look and Say" puzzle data. We view the problem as building a translator from one set of tokens to another. We apply both standard LSTMs and Transformer/Attention -- based neural networks, using publicly available machine translation software. We observe that despite the amazing accuracy (on both, training and test data), the performance of the trained programs on the actual L\&S sequence is bad. We then discuss a few possible ramifications of this finding and connections to other work, experimental and theoretical. First, from the cognitive science perspective, we argue that we need better mathematical models of abstraction. Second, the classical and more recent results on the universality of neural networks should be re-examined for functions acting on discrete data sets. Mapping on discrete sets usually have no natural continuous extensions. This connects the results on a simple puzzle to more sophisticated results on modeling of mathematical functions, where algebraic functions are more difficult to model than e.g. differential equations. Third, we hypothesize that for problems such as ``Look and Say", computing the parity of bitstrings, or learning integer addition, it might be worthwhile to introduce concepts from topology, where continuity is defined without the reference to the concept of distance.
翻译:抽象、 计算和使用系统 2 推理的能力是智慧和理解的著名表现。 在本文中, 我们用“ 外观与 Say” 谜题的例子来论证, 尽管深神经网络在接受大型数据集培训时能够表现出高“ 能力”( 以精确度衡量) (我们的例子中有两个M ), 但是它们并没有显示出任何迹象, 更深刻地理解问题, 或者D. Dennett 称之为“ 解读 ” 。 我们在“ 外观与 Say” 谜题数据上报告了两套实验。 我们认为, 问题在于从一组符号到另一组符号的翻译。 我们使用基于神经网络的标准 LSTM 和变异器/ 变异器( 以神经网络为基础 ), 我们发现尽管有惊人的准确性( 培训和测试数据), 但是在实际的L ⁇ S 序列上, 或 Dennett 中, 训练程序的表现并不那么好。 我们接着讨论这个模型的发现和连接到其它工作、 实验和理论的几组。 首先, 我们说, 我们需要更好的数学模型模型模型的模型 模型 模型应该比 更清楚的模型的模型的模型 。