@rohanpaul_ai: Columbia CS Prof Vishal Misra explains why LLMs can’t generate new science ideas. Bcz LLMs learn a structured map, Baye…
Summary
Columbia CS Prof Vishal Misra argues LLMs can’t generate truly novel science because they only interpolate within learned Bayesian manifolds rather than create new conceptual maps.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 04/21/26, 05:13 PM
Columbia CS Prof Vishal Misra explains why LLMs can’t generate new science ideas. Bcz LLMs learn a structured map, Bayesian manifold of known data & work well within it, but fail outside it. True discovery requires creating new maps, which LLMs can’t do
Similar Articles
LLM Neuroanatomy III - LLMs seem to think in geometry, not language
Researcher analyzes LLM internal representations across 8 languages and multiple models, finding that concept thinking occurs in geometric space in middle transformer layers independent of input language, supporting a universal deep structure hypothesis similar to Chomsky's theory rather than Sapir-Whorf linguistic relativism.
The Problem with “Mathematically Proven” Claims About LLMs (15 minute read)
This article critiques the sensationalized media coverage of mathematical proofs regarding LLM limitations, specifically highlighting how conditional results about self-improvement are often misrepresented as universal impossibilities.
Agents Explore but Agents Ignore: LLMs Lack Environmental Curiosity
Academic study shows LLM agents frequently discover complete solutions in their environments but almost never use them, revealing a missing "environmental curiosity" capability critical for open-ended tasks.
Quoting Bryan Cantrill
Bryan Cantrill critiques LLMs for lacking the optimization constraint of human laziness, arguing that LLMs will unnecessarily complicate systems rather than improve them, and highlighting how human time limitations drive the development of efficient abstractions.
LLM rankings are not a ladder: experimental results from a transitive benchmark graph [D]
The author introduces LLM Win, a tool that visualizes LLM benchmark results as a directed graph to analyze transitive relationships and ranking reversals. Experimental findings suggest that LLM rankings function more like a capability graph with high weak-to-strong reachability rather than a linear ladder.