On: Introducing deep research

[panarky]

> they are probabilistic language models

This is like arguing an Airbus cannot possibly fly because it is 165 tonnes of aluminum, steel and plastic.

The proof is in the fact that it flies, not what it is constructed from.

[ADeerAppeared → panarky]

> The proof is in the fact that it flies, not what it is constructed from.

And LLMs do not.

> "But it looks like reasoning to me"

My condolences. You should go see a doctor about your inability to count the number of 'R's in a word.

[panarky → ADeerAppeared]

"Even though that Airbus looks like it's flying it's really not because my personal definition of 'flying' requires feathers and flapping wings."

[CamperBob2 → ADeerAppeared]

OK, what's your next move, now that letter-counting has been solved by the current generation of frontier models?

CoT reasoning is reasoning, whether you like it or not. If you don't understand that, it means the models are already smarter than you.