For example "..ARC captures the logical leap, it misses the manipulative component—the physical sensation and embodied simulation..." makes lots of assumptions on how such a discovery must occur, e.g. through "physical sensation and embodied simulation". Results matter, not the path there.

For example, quantization of energy, at the core of QM, wasn't discovered through "physical sensation and embodied simulation" at all. Planck simply found that if energy is quantized, then one obtained the observed black-body radiation spectrum. There was no "physical sensation and embodied simulation".

[1] https://support.apple.com/en-az/guide/mac-help/mchlp2299/mac

"New features available with macOS Sonoma" doc states "Autocorrect fixes mistakes for you more accurately than ever before by leveraging a new transformer language model in English, French, and Spanish keyboards." [2]

"Introducing Apple’s On-Device and Server Foundation Models" blog post states "Apple Intelligence is comprised of multiple highly-capable generative models that...have been fine-tuned for user experiences such as writing and refining text.. In the following overview, we will detail how two of these models — a ~3 billion parameter on-device language model, and a larger server-based language model."[3]

"A look at Apple’s new Transformer-powered predictive text model" blog post[4] is the kind of deep dive you'd have to do to find out what's going on under the hood in your spelling/grammar checker. TL;DR AppleSpell uses GPT-2 which proves my point.

[1] https://eu.usatoday.com/story/tech/2023/06/06/wwdc-2023-appl...

[2] https://www.apple.com/mideast/macos/sonoma/pdf/en/macOS_All_...

[3] https://machinelearning.apple.com/research/introducing-apple...

[4] https://jackcook.com/2023/09/08/predictive-text.html

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_LLC_v._Oracle_America,_...

This "moving the goalposts", requiring me to know the internals of say a closed source product, just proves my original point. I can't know if an LLM is being used because I don't have the source code.

[1] https://aclanthology.org/2024.emnlp-main.966/

I think history agrees too, i.e. machine code > assembly language > high-level programming language > prompts.

I am speaking of spelling/grammar checkers are part of the IDE and/or OS.

You'd have to know your IDE and/or OS's implementation details to know you are not using an LLM based one.

However, I don't know if I am as I haven't seen, and will likely never see, the implementation behind the text box that is suggesting the next letter, word, or spelling correction as I type.

It states in part:

> Until that policy is in place, the Governing Board has approved this interim policy:

> Contributions in the OpenJDK Community must not include content generated, in part or in full, by large language models...

Note, this would exclude most spell checkers, as they often are LLM based. That said, they do soften this with the addition:

> Q: Is it okay to continue using the spell-checking, grammar-checking, auto-completion, and refactoring features in my editor or IDE?

> A: Yes, so long as they are not based on large language models or similar deep-learning systems.

This addition will likely not help as most spell checkers are OS/IDE services and their implementation details are opaque to users.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trepanning

He's a 48.0/100, things that make you go Hmmm.

- Varies from 102.0/100 to 100.0/100

- Missed lots of OSS work

- Misinterprets GSoC work (Thinks projects I started that were contributed to in GSoC implies that I received a GSoC stipend)

- Areas for improvement seem to vary inconsistently (There's not enough project detail to there's too much project detail)

I still don't make company cut offs ¯\_(ツ)_/¯