HackerPapers

arXiv:2212.11281cs.CL

Language models are better than humans at next-token prediction

Buck Shlegeris, Fabien Roger, Lawrence Chan, Euan McLean

Early discovery. Linked by one identifiable commenter. This paper is outside the main ranking; a mention is not an endorsement.

Abstract

Current language models are considered to have sub-human capabilities at natural language tasks like question-answering or writing code. However, language models are not trained to perform well at these tasks, they are trained to accurately predict the next token given previous tokes in tokenized text. It is not clear whether language models are better or worse than humans at next token prediction. To try to answer this question, we performed two distinct experiments to directly compare humans and language models on this front: one measuring top-1 accuracy and the other measuring perplexity. In both experiments, we find humans to be consistently \emph{worse} than even relatively small language models like GPT3-Ada at next-token prediction.

arXiv comments
Edit: TMLR 2024, more analysis of the results were added
Journal reference
DOI
Subjects
cs.CLComputation and Language cs.AIArtificial Intelligence cs.LGMachine Learning

On Hacker News

Linked by 1 identifiable commenter in 2 comments across 2 threads, from May 2023 to May 2023.

Comments linking this paper, per year.

Discussed in comments2 threads

    • >You also literally said that: > We already know that the higher the parameter count, the lower the training data required >And if you scroll up a bit, you'll see that this was the assertion that I've been questioning since the beginning. They follow each other. If you have a…

      famouswafflesView on HNParent context

Submitted to Hacker News

Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.