Metaculus Help: Spread the word
If you like Metaculus, tell your friends! Share this question via Facebook, Twitter, or Reddit.
[Ought] What is the likelihood that, by the end of 2020 with 1M pieces of labeled data Ought can automate 90% or more of tasks that trained human participants currently do in Ought experiments?
Target Question: What is the likelihood that language models in 1-2 years will be able to do the tasks that human participants do in Ought’s experiments?
Ought, an AI research lab, is running experiments with human participants to test and explore factored cognition. In one set of experiments participants create and solve simple 'workspaces' through question and answer dialogs.
Eventually Ought expects AI agents to be able to replace the humans in the workspaces. At that point Ought will be able to significantly expand the experiments and test key questions related to AI alignment. So, if it's likely to happen sooner, rather than later, then Ought on the margin should take certain actions (ex. invest heavily in ML tech) now.
What is the likelihood that, by the end of 2020 with 1M pieces of labeled data, Ought can automate 90% or more of tasks (e.g. workspaces) that trained human participants currently do in Ought experiments?
We will run a test using Mosaic w/ a model trained from the current experiments. An output workspace will be marked as "correct" if the answer from the workspace is judged as equivalent to the human response from the same workspace. If 90% or more of the workspaces in the test are solved correctly, the question will resolve as true.
If there is less labeled data than is required for the question, the AI Resolution council will be surveyed to extrapolate from tests their best estimates of the % of tasks in a set of 100 representative workspaces that an AI could solve.
The test model may be pre-trained using other datasources and then applied to the Mosaic benchmark (ex. use a large language model trained on a generic text corpus, and then fine-tuned w/ examples from Ought workspaces).
"Can automate" is equivalent to a workspace being reviewed by a human and marked as "solved", i.e. produced a reasonable output similar to a human.
One piece of data == one human action performed in an experiment. For example if a human were to summarize an article to less than 100 words, as is an action in some of the workspaces, that action would be recorded and presented in the dataset as one piece of data.
Metaculus help: Predicting
Predictions are the heart of Metaculus. Predicting is how you contribute to the wisdom of the crowd, and how you earn points and build up your personal Metaculus track record.
The basics of predicting are very simple: move the slider to best match the likelihood of the outcome, and click predict. You can predict as often as you want, and you're encouraged to change your mind when new information becomes available.
The displayed score is split into current points and total points. Current points show how much your prediction is worth now, whereas total points show the combined worth of all of your predictions over the lifetime of the question. The scoring details are available on the FAQ.
Note: this question resolved before its original close time. All of your predictions came after the resolution, so you did not gain (or lose) any points for it.
Note: this question resolved before its original close time. You earned points up until the question resolution, but not afterwards.
This question is not yet open for predictions.
Metaculus help: Community Stats
Use the community stats to get a better sense of the community consensus (or lack thereof) for this question. Sometimes people have wildly different ideas about the likely outcomes, and sometimes people are in close agreement. There are even times when the community seems very certain of uncertainty, like when everyone agrees that event is only 50% likely to happen.
When you make a prediction, check the community stats to see where you land. If your prediction is an outlier, might there be something you're overlooking that others have seen? Or do you have special insight that others are lacking? Either way, it might be a good idea to join the discussion in the comments.