日本フィジカルAI新聞

世界のフィジカルAIを、日本語で。

週刊ニュースレター購読
推論arXiv:2608.14397v1

LLMは跳躍の代償を払わない

LLMs Don't Pay for the Jump

シェア:XThreadsFacebookLINEはてブBluesky

大規模言語モデルはアブダクション(仮説形成)に必要な「跳躍」ができず、その原因は身体性の欠如ではなく、認識論的誤りが物理的コストに結びつく仕組みがないことだと論じた論文。

著者: Paras Balani, Subhrakanta Panda

分類: cs.AI, cs.CL

原文アブストラクト

Zahavy [2026] argues that Large Language Models, despite their capabilities in induction and deduction, cannot perform the abductive "Jump" that produced Einstein's equivalence principle, and attributes this limitation to the absence of embodied simulation. Zheng-Xin [2026] and Farmer [2026] question whether embodiment is necessary for abduction, pointing to alternative routes to General Relativity and forms of abduction that require no sensorimotor grounding. Max Planck resolved the blackbody radiation problem in 1900. Planck's move to E = hν required no embodied simulation. It was motivated by a mathematical consequence of classical theory, an infinite predicted energy for a finite measured quantity, that could not be physically accepted. We show that neither induction nor deduction could have produced the postulate and argue that its adoption required a coupling between epistemic error and physical cost. We formalize this distinction through thermodynamic coupling and show that fixed-weight transformer inference lacks such coupling, regardless of model scale. This is consistent with empirical results showing that output entropy remains nearly unchanged across tasks with sharply increasing causal difficulty, even as accuracy falls from 100% to 17%. We therefore argue that the missing ingredient in machine abduction may lie deeper than embodiment: a system must have some physical mechanism through which epistemic error becomes costly enough to force revision.