Category: Machine Learning

On the Usefulness of LLMs and Other Deep Learning Models

Lately I’ve been thinking a lot about the state of “AI” and its implications for us embodied “human intelligences”. Hardly a week (or even a day) goes by without some Silicon Valley titan proclaiming that “AI is smarter than humans” and arguing about whether this is good or bad for us as a species. “It’s a white-collar apocalypse”, “There will be all kinds of new jobs!”, “We are now confident we know how to build AGI as we have traditionally understood it.” What’s missing from these statements are clear definitions for terms like “smarter”and “intelligent”, and when they are provided, they conflict with what we already know. Consider Sam Altman’s definition of AGI:“AI systems that can perform most economically valuable work as well as or better than humans.” Or think about the well-respected Turing Test, which judges machine intelligence based on a human’s ability to distinguish the behavior of a machine from a human, based on specific intellectual tasks. That reduces human intelligence to competence at tasks that can be completed at a keyboard. I find the narrow scope of such definitions unsatisfying.

I recently returned from a mission trip to Guatemala, where I worked side-by-side with local masons, who mix concrete and plaster by hand and improvise solutions to deal with tricky build sites and keep homes dry in the rainy season. That was a humbling lesson in the limits of the kind of “intelligence” my PhD and digital skills afford me. Those guys are performing intelligent, economically valuable work. Then there are the nurses at the clinics I’ve visited recently whose reading of a patient’s physical and emotional state include levels of cultural and social nuance in addition to the complex medical conditions of the human body. In fact, scientists, engineers, technicians, nurses, farmers, and floral designers who solve problems all the time in environments full of uncertainty and human need are applying forms of intelligence and performing economically valuable work that no LLM can touch. These are embodied, culturally embedded, and morally aware practices—not lines of text on a screen.

“But wait,” you say, “LLMs like ChatGPT and Claude are amazing! Why are you being such a curmudgeon?” I agree. In fact, ChatGPT helped me draft this piece, and although I ended up throwing away most of what it wrote, its ability to do research and summary is excellent. It also pointed me to some resources faster than I would have found them on my own. So is ChatGPT “smarter” than me? I think the more interesting question is “When does ChatGPT, LLM or other AI, have an advantage over me?”

What started me down this path was a couple of articles I came across recently. Bruce Schneier and Will Anderson wrote at The Conversation about 4 axes, what they call “The 4 S’s”, of technology’s advantages over humans. The article is not long and worth a read; in short they point out that AI often has an advantage over humans when it comes to speed, scale, scope, and sophistication. When those are the barriers, it can make sense to implement AI. When they’re not, introduction of AI can feel gratuitous, or even downright annoying; witness auto-completion for text messages, or the many customer service chatbots. Schneier and Anderson point out that companies implement them seeking to benefit from scale, but customers don’t see benefits from speed or sophistication, and they suffer from the loss of human communication in terms of empathy, sincerity, context, and problem solving ability. But there are many contexts where AIs are able to surpass the performance of humans, such as when playing Chess or Go, analyzing protein folding structures, and identifying promising materials for engineering applications.

However, there are contexts and situations where the perception of speed up is actually illusory. In July 2025, the folks at Model Evaluation & Threat Research (METR) published a study of 16 experienced senior developers of large open source software projects in which they recorded and analyzed their activity as they resolved issues from the issue tracker on their project. The study controlled their use of the AI tool of their choice. The key finding was that the developers generally reported believing that AI had sped them up by 20% or more, when in fact it took them on average 19% longer to resolve the issues. They point out that often the benchmarks used to measure the productivity gains of AI coding tools don’t reflect the kinds of tasks found “in the wild” and thus aren’t helpful. Even self-reporting by experienced developers are not a reliable guide to productivity impacts. Also of interest is this white paper from GitClear on the decline in code quality with the use of AI coding tools.

Developers generally reported believing that AI had sped them up by 20% or more, when in fact it took them on average 19% longer to resolve issues from large, mature, open-source projects.

Furthermore, there are limits to the level of sophistication even “reasoning” models can attain. In a refreshingly honest piece from Apple, published in June 2025, the authors discuss the strengths and weaknesses of standard models (LLMs) and large reasoning models (LRMS) in performing tasks of varying complexity. They find a hard limit on the complexity of problems for which LLMs and LRMs are capable of finding solutions, even given arbitrarily more computing power.

The real danger of technology is not that it will become too intelligent and take over, but that it will become too convenient and seduce us into delegating the most human parts of our lives.

Andy Crouch, The Life We’re Looking For

So what’s my point in all of this? It’s surely not to reject the amazing tools available to us in the era of LLMs. It’s to recognize them as tools with strengths and weaknesses. And it’s also to remember something that Andy Crouch, an author whose commentary on the relationship of humans to technology I respect, talks about in his book The Life We’re Looking For, that superpowers often take something of our humanity when we assume them. When we step on an airplane to assume the superpower of crossing a continent in a matter of hours, we have to remain very still and give up exercise and mobility for the time it takes to travel. When by using our mobile phone we assume the superpower of navigating a city we’ve never been to before, we erode our human ability to find our way on our own (with consequences for cognitive decline, as it turns out, see this book and this article among others for nuance on the subject and what to do about it). And perhaps most relevant for this post, when you hand over the job of writing (code, or blog posts, or novels) to an LLM, you are eroding your ability to think about problems. As I’ve said before, learning to code is really learning to think about problems, and writing code is actively engaging with the problem in constructive ways.

This is why I founded Diller Digital, and why I still passionately believe in teaching coding skills. This principle guides the way we teach: starting with foundational principles and building up practical knowledge through examples and exercises with increasing independence. This is why by the end of a class, we are teaching you how to find out the answers to your questions for yourself using the knowledge framework we’ve developed together. We value human intelligence—not because it’s flawless, but because it’s rooted in judgment, context, and a lived understanding of the world. We believe machine learning is most powerful when it extends what humans can already do well. We build our courses to empower you to apply these tools responsibly, creatively, and critically.

Batching and Folding in Machine Learning – What’s the Difference?

In a recent session of Machine Learning for Scientists & Engineers, we were talking about the use of folds in cross-validation, and a student did one of my favorite things — he asked a perceptive question. “How is folding related to the concept of batching I’ve heard about for deep learning?” We had a good discussion about batching and folding in machine learning and what the differences and similarities are.

What is Machine Learning?

Terms like “AI” and “machine learning” have become nearly meaningless in casual conversation and advertising media—especially since the arrival of large language models like ChatGPT. At Diller Digital, we define AI (that is, “artificial intelligence”) as computerized decision-making, covering areas from robotics and computer vision to language processing and machine learning.

Machine learning refers to the development of predictive models that are configured, or trained, by exposure to sample data rather than by explicitly encoded interactions. For example, you can develop a classification model that sorts pictures into dogs and cats by showing it a lot of examples of photos of dogs and cats. (Sign up for the class to learn the details of how to do this.).

Or you can develop a regression model to predict the temperature at my house tomorrow by training the model on the last 10 years’ worth of measurements of temperature, pressure, humidity, etc. from my personal weather station.

Classical vs Deep Learning

Broadly speaking, there are two kinds of machine learning: what we at Diller Digital call classical machine learning and deep learning. Classical machine learning is characterized by relatively small data sets, and it requires a skilled modeler to do feature engineering to make the best use of the available (and limited) training data. This is the subject of our Machine Learning for Scientists & Engineers class. Deep Learning is a subset of machine learning that makes use of many-layered models that function in a rough analog to how the neurons in a human brain function. Training such models requires much more data but less manual feature engineering by the modeler. The skill in deep learning is that of configuring the architecture of the model, and that is the subject of our Deep Learning for Scientists & Engineers.

Parameters and Hyperparameters

There is one more pair of definitions we need to cover before we can talk about folding versus batching: parameters and hyperparameters.

At the heart of both kinds of machine learning is the adjustment of a model’s parameters, sometimes also called coefficients or weights. Simply stated, these are the coefficients of what boils down to a linear regression problem.

Each model also has what are called hyperparameters, or parameters that govern how the model behaves algorithmically. These might include things like how you score your model’s performance or what method you use to update the model weights.

The process of training a model is the process of adjusting the parameters until you get the best possible predictions from your model. For this reason, we typically divide our training data into two parts: one (the training data set) for adjusting the weights, the other (the testing data set) for assessing the performance of the model. It’s important to score your model on data that was not used in the training step because you’re testing its predictive power on things it hasn’t seen before.

What is Folding?

So this brings us finally to the subject of folding and batching. Folding typically arises in the context of cross-validation, when you’re trying to decide on the best hyperparameters to use for your model. That process involves fitting your model with different sets of hyperparameters and seeing which combination gives the best results. How can you do that without using your test data set? (If we used the test data set during training, that would be cheating because it would sacrifice the ability of your model to generalize for the short-term gain of a better result.) We divide our training data into folds and hold each fold back as a “mini-test” data set and train on the others. We successively hold each fold back and then average the scores across the folds. That becomes our cross-validation score and gives us a way to score that set of hyperparameters without dipping into the test data set.

Folds divide a training data set into sections, one of which is held out as a mini “test” section for scoring a combination of hyperparameters in cross-validation.

What is Batching?

Batching looks a lot like folding but is a distinct concept used in a different context. Batching arises in the context of training deep models, and it serves two purposes. First, training a deep learning model typically requires a lot of training data (orders of magnitude more data than classical methods), and except for trivial cases you can’t fit all the training data into working memory at the same time. You solve that problem by dividing the training data into batches in much the same way that you would divide it into folds for cross-validation, and then iteratively update the model parameters using each batch of data until you have used the entire training data set. One full pass through all of the batches is called an epoch. Training a deep learning model typically takes multiple epochs.

A training data set is divided into batches to reduce memory requirements and provide variation for model parameter refinement. Each batch is used once per training epoch.

Beyond considerations of working memory, there’s a second important reason to train a deep model on batches: because there are so many model parameters with so many possible configurations, and because of the way the layers of the model insulate some of the parameters from information in the test data set, it’s helpful that smaller batches are “noisier” and provide more variation for the training algorithm to use to adjust the model parameters. As a physical analogy, you might think of the way that shaking a pan while you poured sand into it would help it settle into a flat surface more quickly than just waiting for gravity to do the work for you, and without shaking you might end up with lumps and bumps.

So hopefully, by this point you can see how folding is similar to batching and how they are distinct concepts. They both similarly divide training data into segments. Folding is used in cross-validation for optimizing hyperparameters, and batching is used in training deep learning models to limit memory requirements and improve convergence for fitting model parameters.

Diller Digital offers Machine Learning for Scientists & Engineers and Deep Learning for Scientists & Engineers at least once per quarter. Sign up to join us, and bring your curiosity, questions, and toughest problems and see what you can learn! Maybe you’ll join the chorus of those who leave glowing feedback.