Clever Hans (Intelligence Misattributon)
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
It's actually not the best analogy for the current fad, I think "confused by a mirror" works much better. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=34850890 although I suppose the idea of attributing intelligence where there isn't any holds.
Clever Hans is a good analogy for (mostly deep learning) ML classifiers, the idea being a, say image classifier, can do extremely well despite not using any features that actually causally inform the decision being made. So when the background changes, or lighting, or some other thing, it fails utterly. This is actually true for almost all image classifiers.
Reminds me a bit of an old demo where you're trying to measure a certain signal shape in the presence of heavy noise. You get shown waveforms and decide if it looks like there might be a signal present or not, and the ones you approve get averaged to pull the signal out. Very quickly, even if all you are shown is zero mean gaussian noise, the average of what you OK'd starts to look like the waveform you're looking for.
https://www.gutenberg.org/cache/epub/2591/pg2591-images.html...
It is also inapplicable to GPTs, as they can answer questions, which the person asking does not know the answer to.
Case closed.
Search engines do this even better than ChatGPT does, and yet we don't call them "generally intelligent".
trickery aside, Hans was clearly intelligent by several metrics. mathematics are not the sole domain.
right in the title.
either it's clearly a gradient/spectrum, or this article isn't making the solid argument it might seem to be.
Nobody said that Hans had no intelligence, the point is that Hans doesn't have the kind of intelligence that was being attributed to him from the arithmetic demonstrations.
More like accidental trickery