logoalt Hacker News

paimapitoday at 1:25 AM1 replyview on HN

is any of this 'scientific'? does AA allow peer review of its processes? are these published in journals of at least medium impact? what are the sample sizes? how grounded is their mechanistic reasoning?

like they have words that are dressed in scientific language on their site like

"We estimate a 95% confidence interval for Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index of less than ±1% - based on experiments with >10 repeats on certain models for all evaluation datasets included in Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v4.2."

but where's the outcome dataset justifying this? how did they get that probability? what was the specific methodology of the tests? what variables did they account for?

there's a major difference between scientific sounding and being truly empirically rigorous. the 'research' in AI intelligence feels somehow even less trustworthy than supplement-funded studies because those are at least subjected to scrutiny by peers without profit motives


Replies

elvin_dtoday at 5:45 AM

why keeping journals as an argument on the tech site that was always less formal with mandatory institutions but more open source. Journals discredited themselves multiple times. tech is expanding boundaries of scientific methods and AI will push it more.