The Stuff We Swim in: Regulation Alone Will Not Lead to Justifiable Trust in AI
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Recent activity in the field of artificial intelligence (AI) has given rise to large language models (LLMs) such as GPT-4 and Bard. These are undoubtedly impressive achievements, but they raise serious questions about appropriation, accuracy, explainability, accessibility, responsibility, and more. There have been pusillanimous and self-exculpating calls for a halt in development by senior researchers in the field and largely self-serving comments by industry leaders around the potential of AI systems, good or bad. Many of these commentaries leverage misguided conceptions, in the popular imagination, of the competence of machine intelligence, based on some sort of Frankenstein or Terminator-like fiction: however, this leaves it entirely unclear what exactly the relationship between human(ity) and AI, as represented by LLMs or what comes after, is or could be.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it