Some reflections on @emilymbender and @alkoller's #acl2020nlp paper on form and meaning, and an attempt to crystallize the ensuing debate: blog.julianmichael.org/2020/07/23/to-…
My take, roughly: there are good points on all sides, and I think we might be able to reconcile the main disagreements once we hash out the details (resolve misinterpretations, make assumptions more explicit, and give more examples). Though, doing so took me 8,000 words (oops).
More specifically: Many of the criticisms of the paper are based on viewing the octopus test as a Turing Test style diagnostic. Within this framing I think the criticisms are valid. But important impacts of the paper's claim apply outside this framing, and are valid as well.
Featuring quotes from the now-gone #acl2020nlp Rocket Chat by Monojit Choudhury, @gneubig, Guy Emerson, @jdunietz, Matt Richardson, Marti Hearst, and @psresnik, in addition to the original authors. Thanks everyone for the vibrant discussion, and hope it continues :)
Big thanks also to @emilymbender and @alkoller for giving feedback on early versions of the post. Emily helped constructively clear up crucial misunderstandings before I went public rather than after—something not really possible in a Twitter debate. What a concept!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
