‘LLMs don’t reason’ seems to equate reasoning with explicit, auditable deliberation. LLMs can draw inferences from premises, even if their explanations do not reliably reveal how they arrived at their conclusions. The article makes a case for more transparent and reliable reasoning, but does not establish the absence of reasoning altogether. The more substantive question, in my view, is whether their representations have semantic content, what could ground that content, and how this affects their reasoning capabilities and limitations.
speak_plainly · · focus · HN ↗