It'd be interesting if the parameter/complexity requirements are actually similar once you examine the system as a whole, meaning machine _and_ human brain.
It'd be interesting if the parameter/complexity requirements are actually similar once you examine the system as a whole, meaning machine _and_ human brain.
This is a very important point. A group of my colleagues (who are not tech people) are much more impressed with the image generation models than with the chat interface, even though the images are often whacky or just wrong. Yet the fact that it tried is impressive to them, with their minds managing to fill in the blanks.
I wonder how this compares to how a toddler speaks vs. paints/draws, which is typically better in the former than the latter. I'm both cases, we fill in the blanks in our minds.
The mapping and motion parts of the human brain are also old evolutionary constructs that could error correct the output of models.