<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Back to the Future for Dialogue Research: A Position Paper · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1812.01144/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1812.01144/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>Back to the Future for Dialogue Research: A Position Paper — mentioned by Seabiscuit</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23627532</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:1812.01144:23627532</guid><pubDate>Wed, 24 Jun 2020 13:22:26 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;These predictions often surely make most sense and are most prevalent in a particular field of NLP research, like dialogue (open-domain, non-task oriented). Believable dialogue seems to require some kind of world knowledge, certain forms of &amp;#x27;common sense&amp;#x27; (e.g. arithmetic reasoning), and the ability to track belief states and be coherent over long periods. GPT-2 was critiqued for its inability to deal with simple arithmetic questions, as well as contradicting itself over long periods [1]. GPT-3 has similar deficiencies in terms of sensible real-world knowledge and displaying coherence both…&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/1812.01144/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>cs.AI</category></item></channel></rss>
