Review: The Welch Labs Illustrated Guide to AI
A review of a rare AI book that uses mathematics to illuminate rather than intimidate, making difficult ideas feel genuinely learnable.
21 posts
A review of a rare AI book that uses mathematics to illuminate rather than intimidate, making difficult ideas feel genuinely learnable.
AI-generated tests can look reassuring while proving very little, exposing a dangerous gap between green checkmarks and real verification.
BEACONS offers a model for reliability that AI systems badly need: explicit bounds, checkable guarantees, and less benchmark theater.
LLMs may act impressively while still failing to know when they are capable, making self-assessment a core safety problem.
OpenAI's usage study shifts attention from benchmark scores to how ordinary people actually use ChatGPT in daily life.
A follow-up on GPT-5's rocky rollout, user frustration, and OpenAI's attempts to tune expectations after launch.
A factual recap of OpenAI's GPT-5 keynote, collecting the main claims, demos, benchmarks, and availability details.
SEAL points toward language models that rewrite their own training material, hinting at AI systems that learn after deployment.
Knowledge graphs are useful, but the post argues they are not a magic cure for LLM hallucination and reasoning failures.
As AI becomes an oracle, a new class of interpreters may emerge to translate machine outputs into human decisions.
OpenAI's competitive-programming work suggests generalist reasoning models can outperform narrow specialists in demanding coding contests.
Goodhart's Law explains why AI alignment can fail when proxy metrics become targets and systems learn the wrong game.
Humanity's Last Exam is framed as a benchmark that tests not only models, but our assumptions about intelligence itself.
Text-to-image models still struggle with counting, making their visual brilliance look surprisingly fragile at the level of basic numeracy.
The opening part of a benchmark series asks what LLM evaluations really measure and why the numbers often mislead.
Part two examines benchmark methods themselves, exposing the assumptions behind the scores used to compare language models.
Part three moves from benchmark scores to application areas, asking where LLM performance actually matters in practice.
Part four digs into the good, bad, and misleading sides of benchmark results and their interpretation.
Part five steps beyond scores to consider real-world limitations, reliability, and practical model behavior.
The final benchmark essay looks toward better evaluation methods that test usefulness rather than leaderboard theater.
GPT-4's Turing-test performance revives the old question of whether fooling humans proves intelligence or just fluency.