undefined

points

[-]

I have worked on similar problems. See e.g. [1].

The LLMs I have tested have terrible world models and intuitions for how actions change the environment. They're also not great at discerning and pursuing the right goals. They're like an infinitely patient five-year old with amazing vocabulary.

[1]: https://entropicthoughts.com/updated-llm-benchmark

(more descriptions available in earlier evaluations referenced from there)

by malfist19 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I'm going to ignore all that and tell my developers working in complicated codebases that they have to use AI. I'm sure comprehending side effects in a world building text adventure is completely different that understanding spaghetti code

by red75prime18 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Desarcasmed version: "I think that problems with Zork make those models virtually useless in programming tasks." Correct?

by cptskippy15 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

He said complicated code bases. LLMs are great at producing small snippets of code to address very targeted problems.

by red75prime12 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Great on small snippets of code, passable on larger pieces of code, great at finding vulnerabilities in large pieces of code, terrible in Zork. All-in-all, a jagged frontier that defies a simple sarcastic characterization.

by girvo1 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Very kiki, not very bouba, as Aphyr rightfully stated.

by seanmcdirmid18 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

You can code your prompts to read and write an external world model on the side. This is what most people do who are seriously doing games with LLMs.

by stingraycharles11 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

What do you mean with this? What is this world model, what does it capture?

by seanmcdirmid9 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

You keep a document going called "state of the world", on every turn, you read this document in (as context), use it to help compute what happens, and based on what happens, create an updated "state of the world" document. You track important details so your LLM is consistent from turn to turn.

If you doing an RPG, which I guess is where this is more obvious, you track the play and enemy positions, their health, their moods and perhaps top thoughts, the state of important inanimate objects. if you break down the door, you update the door's state in the document. This is in contrast to just giving the LLM the previous turns and hoping it realizes the door is broken down later (just by statistical completion).

by Schlagbohrer5 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I would love to see consistent-world-state-capturing more integrated into, for example, SillyTavern.

by mnky9800n20 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

we should talk. i sent you an email.

by WarmWash22 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

The open models only give the SOTA models a run for their money on gameable benchmarks. On the semi-private ARC-AGI 2 sets they do absolutely awfully (<10% while SOTA is at ~80%)

It might be too expensive, but I would be interested in the benchmarks for the current crop of SOTA models.

by roenxi21 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Have the open models been tried? When I look at the leaderboard [0] the only qwen model I see is 235B-A22B. I wouldn't expect an MoE model to do particularly well, from what I've seen (thinking mainly of a leaderboard trying to measure EQ [1]) MoE models are at a distinct disadvantage to regular models when it comes to complex tasks that aren't software benchmark targets.

[0] https://arcprize.org/leaderboard

[1] https://eqbench.com/index.html

by WarmWash19 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

There is GLM 5 and kimi 2.5 (which gets 11.8%, but I digress)

by CamperBob220 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

Actually the Zorks weren't deterministic, especially Zork II. The Wizard could F you over pretty badly if he appeared at an inopportune time.

by Schlagbohrer4 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Was that using an RNG? Or is the entire game deterministic?

by doingthehula18 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

[dead]