large language model

google-upstages-itself-with-gemini-15-ai-launch,-one-week-after-ultra-1.0

Google upstages itself with Gemini 1.5 AI launch, one week after Ultra 1.0

Gemini’s Twin —

Google confusingly overshadows its own pro product a week after its last major AI launch.

The Gemini 1.5 logo

Enlarge / The Gemini 1.5 logo, released by Google.

Google

One week after its last major AI announcement, Google appears to have upstaged itself. Last Thursday, Google launched Gemini Ultra 1.0, which supposedly represented the best AI language model Google could muster—available as part of the renamed “Gemini” AI assistant (formerly Bard). Today, Google announced Gemini Pro 1.5, which it says “achieves comparable quality to 1.0 Ultra, while using less compute.”

Congratulations, Google, you’ve done it. You’ve undercut your own premiere AI product. While Ultra 1.0 is possibly still better than Pro 1.5 (what even are we saying here), Ultra was presented as a key selling point of its “Gemini Advanced” tier of its Google One subscription service. And now it’s looking a lot less advanced than seven days ago. All this is on top of the confusing name-shuffling Google has been doing recently. (Just to be clear—although it’s not really clarifying at all—the free version of Bard/Gemini currently uses the Pro 1.0 model. Got it?)

Google claims that Gemini 1.5 represents a new generation of LLMs that “delivers a breakthrough in long-context understanding,” and that it can process up to 1 million tokens, “achieving the longest context window of any large-scale foundation model yet.” Tokens are fragments of a word. The first part of the claim about “understanding” is contentious and subjective, but the second part is probably correct. OpenAI’s GPT-4 Turbo can reportedly handle 128,000 tokens in some circumstances, and 1 million is quite a bit more—about 700,000 words. A larger context window allows for processing longer documents and having longer conversations. (The Gemini 1.0 model family handles 32,000 tokens max.)

But any technical breakthroughs are almost beside the point. What should we make of a company that just trumpeted to the world about its AI supremacy last week, only to partially supersede that a week later? Is it a testament to the rapid rate of AI technical progress in Google’s labs, a sign that red tape was holding back Ultra 1.0 for too long, or merely a sign of poor coordination between research and marketing? We honestly don’t know.

So back to Gemini 1.5. What is it, really, and how will it be available? Google implies that like 1.0 (which had Nano, Pro, and Ultra flavors), it will be available in multiple sizes. Right now, Pro 1.5 is the only model Google is unveiling. Google says that 1.5 uses a new mixture-of-experts (MoE) architecture, which means the system selectively activates different “experts” or specialized sub-models within a larger neural network for specific tasks based on the input data.

Google says that Gemini 1.5 can perform “complex reasoning about vast amounts of information,” and gives an example of analyzing a 402-page transcript of Apollo 11’s mission to the Moon. It’s impressive to process documents that large, but the model, like every large language model, is highly likely to confabulate interpretations across large contexts. We wouldn’t trust it to soundly analyze 1 million tokens without mistakes, so that’s putting a lot of faith into poorly understood LLM hands.

For those interested in diving into technical details, Google has released a technical report on Gemini 1.5 that appears to show Gemini performing favorably versus GPT-4 Turbo on various tasks, but it’s also important to note that the selection and interpretation of those benchmarks can be subjective. The report does give some numbers on how much better 1.5 is compared to 1.0, saying it’s 28.9 percent better than 1.0 Pro at “Math, Science & Reasoning” and 5.2 percent better at those subjects than 1.0 Ultra.

A table from the Gemini 1.5 technical document showing comparisons to Gemini 1.0.

Enlarge / A table from the Gemini 1.5 technical document showing comparisons to Gemini 1.0.

Google

But for now, we’re still kind of shocked that Google would launch this particular model at this particular moment in time. Is it trying to get ahead of something that it knows might be just around the corner, like OpenAI’s unreleased GPT-5, for instance? We’ll keep digging and let you know what we find.

Google says that a limited preview of 1.5 Pro is available now for developers via AI Studio and Vertex AI with a 128,000 token context window, scaling up to 1 million tokens later. Gemini 1.5 apparently has not come to the Gemini chatbot (formerly Bard) yet.

Google upstages itself with Gemini 1.5 AI launch, one week after Ultra 1.0 Read More »

elon-musk’s-new-ai-bot,-grok,-causes-stir-by-citing-openai-usage-policy

Elon Musk’s new AI bot, Grok, causes stir by citing OpenAI usage policy

You are what you eat —

Some experts think xAI used OpenAI model outputs to fine-tune Grok.

Illustration of a broken robot exchanging internal gears.

Grok, the AI language model created by Elon Musk’s xAI, went into wide release last week, and people have begun spotting glitches. On Friday, security tester Jax Winterbourne tweeted a screenshot of Grok denying a query with the statement, “I’m afraid I cannot fulfill that request, as it goes against OpenAI’s use case policy.” That made ears perk up online since Grok isn’t made by OpenAI—the company responsible for ChatGPT, which Grok is positioned to compete with.

Interestingly, xAI representatives did not deny that this behavior occurs with its AI model. In reply, xAI employee Igor Babuschkin wrote, “The issue here is that the web is full of ChatGPT outputs, so we accidentally picked up some of them when we trained Grok on a large amount of web data. This was a huge surprise to us when we first noticed it. For what it’s worth, the issue is very rare and now that we’re aware of it we’ll make sure that future versions of Grok don’t have this problem. Don’t worry, no OpenAI code was used to make Grok.”

In reply to Babuschkin, Winterbourne wrote, “Thanks for the response. I will say it’s not very rare, and occurs quite frequently when involving code creation. Nonetheless, I’ll let people who specialize in LLM and AI weigh in on this further. I’m merely an observer.”

A screenshot of Jax Winterbourne's X post about Grok talking like it's an OpenAI product.

Enlarge / A screenshot of Jax Winterbourne’s X post about Grok talking like it’s an OpenAI product.

Jason Winterbourne

However, Babuschkin’s explanation seems unlikely to some experts because large language models typically do not spit out their training data verbatim, which might be expected if Grok picked up some stray mentions of OpenAI policies here or there on the web. Instead, the concept of denying an output based on OpenAI policies would probably need to be trained into it specifically. And there’s a very good reason why this might have happened: Grok was fine-tuned on output data from OpenAI language models.

“I’m a bit suspicious of the claim that Grok picked this up just because the Internet is full of ChatGPT content,” said AI researcher Simon Willison in an interview with Ars Technica. “I’ve seen plenty of open weights models on Hugging Face that exhibit the same behavior—behave as if they were ChatGPT—but inevitably, those have been fine-tuned on datasets that were generated using the OpenAI APIs, or scraped from ChatGPT itself. I think it’s more likely that Grok was instruction-tuned on datasets that included ChatGPT output than it was a complete accident based on web data.”

As large language models (LLMs) from OpenAI have become more capable, it has been increasingly common for some AI projects (especially open source ones) to fine-tune an AI model output using synthetic data—training data generated by other language models. Fine-tuning adjusts the behavior of an AI model toward a specific purpose, such as getting better at coding, after an initial training run. For example, in March, a group of researchers from Stanford University made waves with Alpaca, a version of Meta’s LLaMA 7B model that was fine-tuned for instruction-following using outputs from OpenAI’s GPT-3 model called text-davinci-003.

On the web you can easily find several open source datasets collected by researchers from ChatGPT outputs, and it’s possible that xAI used one of these to fine-tune Grok for some specific goal, such as improving instruction-following ability. The practice is so common that there’s even a WikiHow article titled, “How to Use ChatGPT to Create a Dataset.”

It’s one of the ways AI tools can be used to build more complex AI tools in the future, much like how people began to use microcomputers to design more complex microprocessors than pen-and-paper drafting would allow. However, in the future, xAI might be able to avoid this kind of scenario by more carefully filtering its training data.

Even though borrowing outputs from others might be common in the machine-learning community (despite it usually being against terms of service), the episode particularly fanned the flames of the rivalry between OpenAI and X that extends back to Elon Musk’s criticism of OpenAI in the past. As news spread of Grok possibly borrowing from OpenAI, the official ChatGPT account wrote, “we have a lot in common” and quoted Winterbourne’s X post. As a comeback, Musk wrote, “Well, son, since you scraped all the data from this platform for your training, you ought to know.”

Elon Musk’s new AI bot, Grok, causes stir by citing OpenAI usage policy Read More »