我的征尘是星辰大海。。。
The dirt and dust from my pilgrimage forms oceans of stars...
-------当记忆的篇章变得零碎，当追忆的图片变得模糊，我们只能求助于数字存储的永恒的回忆
作者:黄教授
手机视频列表
大模型堆算力的困局
视频
音频
原始脚本
大模型困局，当堆数据走到尽头，人类的举一反三或许是破局关键。 打开手机等电梯时，你是否遇过这样的怪事？明明显示从一楼向上来的电梯近在眼前，却因中途层层停靠，迟迟不到。 而之前向下驶离的电梯，反而在抵达一楼折返后，一路畅行先到你面前。 这种后发先至的巧合，竟让人想起解放战争中的豫东之战。 粟裕包围欧寿年兵团时，近在咫尺的邱清泉兵团，因遭遇解放军重兵阻击，寸步难行。 原本向兖州方向看似南辕北辙的黄柏涛兵团，却在接到调令后掉头驰援，成为最先接近战场的救援力量。 两个看似无关的场景，为何能被人类轻易关联？这背后藏着人类学习的核心密码，也恰恰指向了当前大语言模型 L L L 陷入的深层困局。 困局，大模型的大力出奇迹正在撞上信息无限的强如今的大模型训练。 似乎陷入了堆数据堆参数的路径依赖。 想让模型更聪明，就不断投喂海量文本，从书籍论文到网络对话，试图用穷尽案例的方式覆盖所有场景。 但这条路正在越走越窄。 一方面，信息的产生速度早已超出穷举的可能。 每天新增的新闻文案对话以亿级体量增长，模型刚完成一轮训练，新的信息期就已涌现，永远追不上最新案例。 另一方面，对数据必然带来对噪音。 模型在记住有用信息的同时，也会收录大量冗余、重复甚至矛盾的内容。 导致回答时张口就来却缺乏逻辑，参数规模越来越大，效率反而越来越低。 这像极了一个人试图背下世界上所有数学题，却在遇到新题型时依然束手无策，只靠记案例永远解决不了未知问题。 而人类早已用千百年的学习经验证明，真正高效的智能，从不是记得多，而是悟得透。 破局线索，人类如何用一个案例抵100个案例？回到开头的电梯与豫东之战，人类之所以能将两者关联。 核心不是记住了电梯层数或兵团番号，而是完成了一次从具体到抽象的提炼，再从抽象到具体的迁移。 这种能力正是大模型目前最缺失的举一反三。 我们小时候听狼外婆的故事，老师总会追问，你学到了什么？没人会纠结狼的毛色或外婆的年龄，而是会提炼出伪装身份、降低警惕、实施伤害的抽抽象逻辑。 学数学时，老师教的不是这道题的答案。 而是勾股定理、方程思想这些通用范式。 这些去粗取精的过程，本质是把具体案例浓缩成符号化的逻辑框架。 就像把一本厚书压缩成一张思维导图，丢掉的是无关细节，留下的是核心规律。 正因为有了这种抽象能力，人类才能用一个范式应对100个场景。 从狼外婆的警惕伪装，迁移到买东西防假货、交友辨真心。 从电梯与豫东之战的阻力反超规律，联想到堵车时近路堵远路通、排队时相邻队慢隔队快。 我们不用记住每一个具体案例，只需调用抽象出的逻辑范式，就能快速理解新场景。 这既是人类对抗记忆有限的智慧，也是高效学习的本质，大模型的未来，从堆数据到反刍数据，复刻人类的认知闭环。 既然人类的抽象迁移路径如此高效，大模型 为何不能借鉴？答案其实很明确，未来的大模型训练不该只追求新增多少数据，而应转向深挖已有数据。 像牛反刍一样，把已学的文本嚼碎、提炼、浓缩，复刻人类从具体到抽象，再从抽象到具体的认知闭环。 第一步，让模型学会提炼范式。 面对豫东之战的文本，模型不该只统计邱清泉、黄百韬等词汇的出现频率，而应主动剥离兵力数字、火车速度等细节，提炼出近距离目标因强阻力停滞、远距离反向目标因无阻力指令调整反超的核心逻辑。 面对电梯运行的描述，也能抽象出初始方向优的目标，因中途干扰延迟，初始方向劣的目标，因无干扰反超的通用框架。 这一步是让模型从记故事升级为懂规律。 第二步，让模型建立范式库并校验。 将提炼出的所有逻辑范式分类存储，比如阻力、反超、伪装、警惕、因果推导等。 同时加入逻辑自洽校验。 当模型想把电梯反超与股票涨跌关联时，能主动验证两者的阻力来源是否同类，结果与原因是否有必然联系。 避免陷入表面相似的荒谬联想。 这一步是让模型从乱关联升级为会推理。 第三步，让模型实现范式迁移。 当模型遇到新场景时，先将其抽象为逻辑范式，再到范式库中匹配。 看到堵车时，近路堵远路通，能快速关联电梯与豫东之战的阻力反超范式，从而理解表面没优势不等于实际结果的规律。 这一步是让模型真正实现举一反三，用有限的范式覆盖无限的场景。 结语，智能的本质从不是穷尽一切，而是看透本质。 人类之所以能在有限的时间和精力里掌握海量知识。 核心不是记忆力超群，而是能抓住事物的本质规律。 大模型要突破当前的困局，也不该再执着于堆数据的蛮力，而应转向提炼范式的巧劲。 从电梯与豫东之战的联想，到狼外婆与防假货的迁移，人类的智能故事从来都是看透本质的故事。 当大模型能像人类一样，从一个案例中提炼出通用规律，再用这个规律理解千万个新场景时，或许才算真正迈出了类人智能的关键一步。 毕竟智能的终极目标从来不是知道所有答案，而是懂得如何找到答案。
修正脚本
大模型困局，当堆数据走到尽头，人类的举一反三或许是破局关键。 打开手机等电梯时，你是否遇过这样的怪事？明明显示从一楼向上来的电梯近在眼前，却因中途层层停靠，迟迟不到。 而之前向下驶离的电梯，反而在抵达一楼折返后，一路畅行先到你面前。 这种后发先至的巧合，竟让人想起解放战争中的豫东之战。 粟裕包围区寿年兵团时，近在咫尺的邱清泉兵团，因遭遇解放军重兵阻击，寸步难行。 原本向兖州方向看似南辕北辙的黄百韬兵团，却在接到调令后掉头驰援，成为最先接近战场的救援力量。 两个看似无关的场景，为何能被人类轻易关联？这背后藏着人类学习的核心密码，也恰恰指向了当前大语言模型 L L L 陷入的深层困局。 困局：大模型的大力出奇迹正在撞上信息无限的高墙，如今的大模型训练。 似乎陷入了堆数据堆参数的路径依赖。 想让模型更聪明，就不断投喂海量文本，从书籍论文到网络对话，试图用穷尽案例的方式覆盖所有场景。 但这条路正在越走越窄。 一方面，信息的产生速度早已超出穷举的可能。 每天新增的新闻文案对话以亿级体量增长，模型刚完成一轮训练，新的信息就已涌现，永远追不上最新案例。 另一方面，堆数据必然带来噪音。 模型在记住有用信息的同时，也会收录大量冗余、重复甚至矛盾的内容。 导致回答时张口就来却缺乏逻辑，参数规模越来越大，效率反而越来越低。 这像极了一个人试图背下世界上所有数学题，却在遇到新题型时依然束手无策，只靠记案例永远解决不了未知问题。 而人类早已用千百年的学习经验证明，真正高效的智能，从不是记得多，而是悟得透。 破局线索，人类如何用一个案例抵100个案例？回到开头的电梯与豫东之战，人类之所以能将两者关联。 核心不是记住了电梯层数或兵团番号，而是完成了一次从具体到抽象的提炼，再从抽象到具体的迁移。 这种能力正是大模型目前最缺失的举一反三。 我们小时候听狼外婆的故事，老师总会追问，你学到了什么？没人会纠结狼的毛色或外婆的年龄，而是会提炼出伪装身份、降低警惕、实施伤害的抽象逻辑。 学数学时，老师教的不是这道题的答案。 而是勾股定理、方程思想这些通用范式。 这些去粗取精的过程，本质是把具体案例浓缩成符号化的逻辑框架。 就像把一本厚书压缩成一张思维导图，丢掉的是无关细节，留下的是核心规律。 正因为有了这种抽象能力，人类才能用一个范式应对100个场景。 从狼外婆的警惕伪装，迁移到买东西防假货、交友辨真心。 从电梯与豫东之战的阻力反超规律，联想到堵车时近路堵远路通、排队时相邻队慢隔队快。 我们不用记住每一个具体案例，只需调用抽象出的逻辑范式，就能快速理解新场景。 这既是人类对抗记忆有限的智慧，也是高效学习的本质，大模型的未来，从堆数据到反刍数据，复刻人类的认知闭环。 既然人类的抽象迁移路径如此高效，大模型 为何不能借鉴？答案其实很明确，未来的大模型训练不该只追求新增多少数据，而应转向深挖已有数据。 像牛反刍一样，把已学的文本嚼碎、提炼、浓缩，复刻人类从具体到抽象，再从抽象到具体的认知闭环。 第一步，让模型学会提炼范式。 面对豫东之战的文本，模型不该只统计邱清泉、黄百韬等词汇的出现频率，而应主动剥离兵力数字、火车速度等细节，提炼出近距离目标因强阻力停滞、远距离反向目标因无阻力指令调整反超的核心逻辑。 面对电梯运行的描述，也能抽象出初始方向优的目标，因中途干扰延迟，初始方向劣的目标，因无干扰反超的通用框架。 这一步是让模型从记故事升级为懂规律。 第二步，让模型建立范式库并校验。 将提炼出的所有逻辑范式分类存储，比如阻力、反超、伪装、警惕、因果推导等。 同时加入逻辑自洽校验。 当模型想把电梯反超与股票涨跌关联时，能主动验证两者的阻力来源是否同类，结果与原因是否有必然联系。 避免陷入表面相似的荒谬联想。 这一步是让模型从乱关联升级为会推理。 第三步，让模型实现范式迁移。 当模型遇到新场景时，先将其抽象为逻辑范式，再到范式库中匹配。 看到堵车时，近路堵远路通，能快速关联电梯与豫东之战的阻力反超范式，从而理解表面没优势不等于实际结果的规律。 这一步是让模型真正实现举一反三，用有限的范式覆盖无限的场景。 结语，智能的本质从不是穷尽一切，而是看透本质。 人类之所以能在有限的时间和精力里掌握海量知识。 核心不是记忆力超群，而是能抓住事物的本质规律。 大模型要突破当前的困局，也不该再执着于堆数据的蛮力，而应转向提炼范式的巧劲。 从电梯与豫东之战的联想，到狼外婆与防假货的迁移，人类的智能故事从来都是看透本质的故事。 当大模型能像人类一样，从一个案例中提炼出通用规律，再用这个规律理解千万个新场景时，或许才算真正迈出了类人智能的关键一步。 毕竟智能的终极目标从来不是知道所有答案，而是懂得如何找到答案。
英文翻译
The big model dilemma: when piling up data reaches its limit, human analogy might be the key to breaking the deadlock. When you open your phone while waiting for the elevator, have you ever encountered this odd situation? The elevator, clearly showing that it is coming up from the first floor and seemingly close, arrives late because it stops at every floor along the way. Meanwhile, the elevator that was heading downward earlier, after reaching the first floor and turning around, arrives before you without any delays. This coincidence of "latecomers surpassing the early starters" surprisingly recalls the Battle of Eastern Henan during the War of Liberation. When Su Yu surrounded the troops of District Shounian, the nearby troops of Qiu Qingquan were blocked by heavy resistance from the People's Liberation Army and could not move an inch. The troops of Huang Baitao, which had initially seemed to head in the opposite direction toward Yanzhou, turned around upon receiving orders to reinforce and became the first rescue force to approach the battlefield. Why can two seemingly unrelated scenarios be easily linked by humans? Behind this lies the core secret of human learning, and it also precisely points to the deep dilemma that large language models (LLMs) are currently facing. The dilemma: the brute-force approach of big models is hitting the infinite wall of information. Current LLM training seems to be stuck in a path dependency of piling up data and parameters. To make the model smarter, researchers continuously feed it massive amounts of text—from books and papers to online conversations—trying to cover all scenarios by exhaustively listing cases. But this path is becoming narrower and narrower. On one hand, the speed of information generation has long surpassed the possibility of exhaustive coverage. The daily increase in news, articles, conversations grows by billions of items. By the time a model completes a round of training, new information has already emerged, making it impossible to keep up with the latest cases. On the other hand, piling up data inevitably brings noise. While the model memorizes useful information, it also ingests a large amount of redundant, repetitive, or even contradictory content. As a result, it answers glibly but lacks logic; as the parameter size grows, efficiency actually declines. This is like a person trying to memorize every math problem in the world, but still being helpless when faced with a new type of problem. Memorizing cases alone can never solve unknown problems. And humans, through thousands of years of learning experience, have proven that truly efficient intelligence is not about remembering more, but about understanding deeply. Clues to breaking the deadlock: how can humans use one case to replace 100 cases? Going back to the elevator and the Battle of Eastern Henan: humans can link the two not because they remember the floor numbers or troop designations, but because they have completed a process of abstraction from the concrete to the general, and then transfer from the general back to the concrete. This ability is exactly what large models lack most: the ability to draw inferences from one example. When we were children, after hearing the story of the "Wolf Grandmother," the teacher always asked, "What did you learn?" Nobody dwelled on the wolf's fur color or the grandmother's age; instead, they extracted the abstract logic of disguising identity, lowering vigilance, and inflicting harm. When learning math, the teacher taught not the answer to a specific problem, but universal paradigms like the Pythagorean theorem or the idea of equations. This process of discarding the dross and extracting the essence is essentially compressing concrete cases into symbolic logical frameworks. It's like compressing a thick book into a mind map: discarding irrelevant details while keeping the core rules. It is because of this ability to abstract that humans can use one paradigm to handle 100 scenarios. From the "Wolf Grandmother's" lesson on guarding against disguise, they transfer to checking for counterfeits when shopping or discerning sincerity in friendships. From the elevator and the Battle of Eastern Henan's rule of "resistance leads to overtaking by later starters," they associate with traffic jams: the short route is congested while the long route is clear; in queues, the adjacent line is slow while the line one away is fast. We don't need to remember every specific case; we only need to invoke the abstracted logical paradigm to quickly understand new scenarios. This is not only human wisdom in coping with limited memory but also the essence of efficient learning. The future of large models: from piling data to "ruminating" data, replicating the human cognitive loop. Since the human path of abstraction and transfer is so efficient, why can't large models borrow from it? The answer is clear: future LLM training should not only focus on adding more data but should shift to digging deeper into existing data. Like a cow chewing its cud, the model should chew up, refine, and condense the texts it has already learned, replicating the human cognitive loop from concrete to abstract and back to concrete. Step one: let the model learn to extract paradigms. When faced with the text of the Battle of Eastern Henan, the model should not merely count the frequency of terms like Qiu Qingquan or Huang Baitao; it should actively strip away details such as troop numbers and train speeds, and extract the core logic: a nearby target with strong resistance stagnates, while a distant target in the opposite direction with no resistance catches up after a command adjustment. When faced with the description of elevator movement, it should also abstract a general framework: the target with an initially favorable direction is delayed by intermediate interruptions, while the target with an initially unfavorable direction overtakes due to no interruptions. This step upgrades the model from "remembering stories" to "understanding rules." Step two: let the model build a paradigm library and validate it. Store all extracted logical paradigms by category, such as resistance, overtaking, disguise, vigilance, causal reasoning, etc. At the same time, add logical consistency checks. When the model tries to associate elevator overtaking with stock price fluctuations, it should actively verify whether the sources of resistance are of the same type and whether the result necessarily follows from the cause. This prevents falling into absurd associations based on superficial similarities. This step upgrades the model from "random associations" to "reasoning." Step three: let the model achieve paradigm transfer. When the model encounters a new scenario, it first abstracts it into a logical paradigm, then matches it in the paradigm library. When seeing a traffic jam (short route congested, long route clear), it quickly associates the "resistance-overtaking" paradigm from the elevator and the Battle of Eastern Henan, thereby understanding the rule that a lack of surface advantage does not determine the actual outcome. This step truly enables the model to learn by analogy, covering infinite scenarios with limited paradigms. Conclusion: The essence of intelligence is never about exhausting everything, but about seeing through to the core. The reason humans can master vast knowledge within limited time and energy is not because of extraordinary memory, but because they can grasp the essential laws of things. For large models to break through the current dilemma, they should no longer cling to the brute force of piling data, but should turn to the finesse of extracting paradigms. From the association between the elevator and the Battle of Eastern Henan, to the transfer from the Wolf Grandmother to anti-counterfeiting, the story of human intelligence has always been a story of seeing through to the essence. When large models can extract a general rule from one case and use it to understand millions of new scenarios, just like humans do, that might be the true key step toward human-like intelligence. After all, the ultimate goal of intelligence is never to know all the answers, but to know how to find them.
back to top