Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 cited by

Imitation versus Innovation: What children can do that large language and language-and-vision models cannot (yet)?

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 2305.07666 v1 pith:IDZYINNV submitted 2023-05-08 cs.AI cs.CL

classification cs.AIcs.CL
keywords modelsimitationlanguagelargewhatchildrenculturalinnovation
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Much discussion about large language models and language-and-vision models has focused on whether these models are intelligent agents. We present an alternative perspective. We argue that these artificial intelligence models are cultural technologies that enhance cultural transmission in the modern world, and are efficient imitation engines. We explore what AI models can tell us about imitation and innovation by evaluating their capacity to design new tools and discover novel causal structures, and contrast their responses with those of human children. Our work serves as a first step in determining which particular representations and competences, as well as which kinds of knowledge or skill, can be derived from particular learning techniques and data. Critically, our findings suggest that machines may need more than large scale language and images to achieve what a child can do.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Reading Without a Reader: Large Language Models Collapse Reading and Writing into a Single Entangled Code

    q-bio.NC 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    In decoder-only LLMs, input and output token codes are coupled but sub-ceiling (E≈0.23–0.35 against floor and ceiling anchors), and no output-side score pair can validly dissociate the model's 'reading' from its 'writing'.

  2. Humanlike Cognitive Patterns as Emergent Phenomena in Large Language Models

    cs.CL 2024-12 conditional novelty 3.0 of 10

    A literature review concludes that LLMs show partial humanlike cognitive patterns in bias, reasoning, and creativity, but the evidence is dominated by GPT models and the 'emergence' framing is not directly tested.

Pith tools