A core debate in AI is whether LLMs, which are text prediction engines, can achieve true intelligence. Critics argue they cannot because they lack a model of the real world. This prevents them from making meaningful, context-aware predictions about future events—a limitation that more data alone may not solve.

The brain's hardware limitations, like slow and stochastic neurons, may actually be advantages. These properties seem perfectly suited for probabilistic inference algorithms that rely on sampling—a task that requires explicit, computationally-intensive random number generation in digital systems. Hardware and algorithm are likely co-designed.

Reinforcement learning incentivizes AIs to find the right answer, not just mimic human text. This leads to them developing their own internal "dialect" for reasoning—a chain of thought that is effective but increasingly incomprehensible and alien to human observers.

"Amortized inference" bakes slow, deliberative reasoning into a fast, single-pass model. While the brain uses a mix, digital minds have a strong incentive to amortize more capabilities. This is because once a capability is baked in, the resulting model can be copied infinitely, unlike a biological brain.

Modern LLMs use a simple form of reinforcement learning that directly rewards successful outcomes. This contrasts with more sophisticated methods, like those in AlphaGo or the brain, which use "value functions" to estimate long-term consequences. It's a mystery why the simpler approach is so effective.

A Harvard study showed LLMs can predict planetary orbits (pattern fitting) but generate nonsensical force vectors when probed. This reveals a critical gap: current models mimic data patterns but don't develop a true, generalizable understanding of underlying physical laws, separating them from human intelligence.

The Fetus GPT experiment reveals that while its model struggles with just 15MB of text, a human child learns language and complex concepts from a similarly small dataset. This highlights the incredible data and energy efficiency of the human brain compared to large language models.

To improve LLM reasoning, researchers feed them data that inherently contains structured logic. Training on computer code was an early breakthrough, as it teaches patterns of reasoning far beyond coding itself. Textbooks are another key source for building smaller, effective models.

A novel training method involves adding an auxiliary task for AI models: predicting the neural activity of a human observing the same data. This "brain-augmented" learning could force the model to adopt more human-like internal representations, improving generalization and alignment beyond what simple labels can provide.