\

The One-Step Trap (In AI Research)

27 points - today at 6:41 PM

Source
  • ssivark

    today at 7:48 PM

    Ha, interesting. I wasn't aware of Sutton's blog post, but if I might make a shameless plug, we demonstrated [1] exactly this problem (see section 4.4.3), and how multi-step world models (using diffusion models as the substrate) could be one potential answer.

    Since then, I have come to like temporally-abstract models more and more. Rolling out in time -- either step-by-step or many steps at once -- suffers from the tyranny of the specific. For long horizon planning with agents, I care (often only approximately) about where I can end up, and seldom about exactly when I end up there. Successor features, GVFs, Forward-Backward representations, and the like seem like they have an elegant approach for structuring thinking at a "high level", instead of generating exponentially large search trees by rolling out microscopic world models.

    [1] https://arxiv.org/abs/2410.05364 (funnily, from around the same time / few months after Sutton's blog post)

    • mxwsn

      today at 8:01 PM

      This is the same reasoning behind why Yann Lecun thought test-time scaling would not work for LLMs: compounding error.

      Instead, the more tokens LLMs use, the better their performance on many tasks. LLMs can self-correct, evidenced by the power of getting models to question themselves by emitting "Wait," in S1. https://arxiv.org/abs/2501.19393

      • gnabgib

        today at 8:08 PM

        (2024)

        • nttylock

          today at 8:00 PM

          [flagged]