AI currently lacks a way of building reusable skills.
Mixed Partly true and partly false in roughly equal measure.
Factual: Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?
What would count as true or false
Judged as of 2019-11-14. True: the research literature of that time shows that AI systems generally could not acquire skills that they could reliably reuse and combine across tasks, with transfer learning, meta-learning and hierarchical reinforcement learning still widely seen as unsolved for this purpose. Mostly true: this was the broad consensus, though there was some limited success (e.g. pretrained models fine-tuned for other tasks) that the claim glosses over. Mixed: substantial reuse already existed in some areas (e.g. ImageNet or BERT-style transfer) while it was clearly lacking in others, such as robotics and reasoning. Mostly false: methods for reusing skills were well established and widely used by 2019, and the claim turns real limits into a total absence. False: the evidence shows that reusable skill-building was a solved, standard capability by then.
Set before the research began.
Evidence (4)
-
E1 Do Better ImageNet Models Transfer Better? CVPR 2019 (Open Access), Simon Kornblith, Jonathon Shlens and Quoc V. Le, Google Brain
“Together, our results show that ImageNet architectures generalize well across datasets, but ImageNet features are less general than previously suggested.”
-
E2 Do Better ImageNet Models Transfer Better? CVPR 2019 (Open Access), Simon Kornblith, Jonathon Shlens and Quoc V. Le, Google Brain
“ImageNet pretraining accelerates convergence and improves performance on many datasets, but its value diminishes with greater training time, more training data, and greater divergence from ImageNet labels.”
-
E3 A Review of Robot Learning for Manipulation: Challenges, Representations, and Algorithms arXiv (Kroemer, Niekum, Konidaris)
“However, despite access to these excellent generic machine learning methods, the challenges of learning robust and versatile manipulation skills are still far from being resolved.”
-
E4 AI Hasn’t Found Its Isaac Newton: Gary Marcus on Deep Learning Defects & ‘Frenemy’ Yann LeCun | Synced Synced · 15 February 2019 Own record
“Almost everything that anybody has ever written in AI is brittle and narrow — it works for the circumstances for which it was built, and it can't adapt.”
Reasoning
A 2019 CVPR paper by independent authors found that ImageNet pretraining speeds up convergence and improves performance on many datasets, and that ImageNet architectures generalize well across datasets, though the features are less general than previously suggested (E1, E2). So substantial reuse of learned representations existed in computer vision. A robot-learning review from the same period says that learning robust and versatile manipulation skills was still far from resolved (E3). Under the criteria, real transfer in some areas alongside clear gaps in others such as robotics fits "mixed".
Cite this claim
Gary Marcus, “AI currently lacks a way of building reusable skills.” (said 14 November 2019). Verdict: mixed. Reliability API, claim c_eb4f38164189, method 0.1.0+c876030c, dataset release v1.1.2. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_eb4f38164189
This claim is in dataset release v1.1.2, with the same verdict.
Reply to this claim
More factual claims by Gary Marcus
-
Mostly true
“Reviews by Joanna Stern and Marques Brownle of one early prototype were damning;”
Reviews by Joanna Stern and Marques Brownlee of one early humanoid robot prototype were damning.
-
Mostly true
“Many would agree we have reached a point of diminishing returns for scaling; faith in scaling as a route to AGI has dissipated.”
-
Mostly true
“Despite all the hype, agents didn’t turn out to be reliable.”
-
Mixed
“but the systems don’t have the knowledge graph to do that.”
-
Resolved true
“Hasn’t worked so far. That’s for sure.”
Bolting extra components onto an LLM and scaling it up has so far not produced human-level AGI.
Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts are made.