How Compaction Works in Pi | EARENDIL

Henrik Karlsson on Twitter / X

When I read lively prose, one thing I notice is that it packs a lot of information per sentence—but not, usually, by being compact. Instead, how to explain it?Take this phrase “an interesting and exciting new finding”—that’s pretty dead. And one of several reasons is that the…— Henrik Karlsson (@phokarlsson) February 24, 2026

Large language models are cultural technologies. What might that mean?

Four different perspectives

LLMs and World Models, Part 1

How do Large Language Models Make Sense of Their “Worlds”?

Scaling Laws Across Model Architectures: A Comparative Analysis of...

The scaling of large language models (LLMs) is a critical research area for the efficiency and effectiveness of model training and deployment. Our work investigates the transferability and...

Models overview

Claude is a family of state-of-the-art large language models developed by Anthropic. This guide introduces the available models and compares their performance.

Recursive Language Models: the paradigm of 2026

How we plan to manage extremely long contexts

Training Compute-Optimal Large Language Models

We investigate the optimal model size and number of tokens for training a transformer language model under a given compute budget. We find that current large language models are significantly undertrained, a consequence of the recent focus on scaling language models whilst keeping the amount of training data constant. By training over 400 language models ranging from 70 million to over 16 billion parameters on 5 to 500 billion tokens, we find that for compute-optimal training, the model size and the number of training tokens should be scaled equally: for every doubling of model size the number of training tokens should also be doubled. We test this hypothesis by training a predicted compute-optimal model, Chinchilla, that uses the same compute budget as Gopher but with 70B parameters and 4$\times$ more more data. Chinchilla uniformly and significantly outperforms Gopher (280B), GPT-3 (175B), Jurassic-1 (178B), and Megatron-Turing NLG (530B) on a large range of downstream evaluation tasks. This also means that Chinchilla uses substantially less compute for fine-tuning and inference, greatly facilitating downstream usage. As a highlight, Chinchilla reaches a state-of-the-art average accuracy of 67.5% on the MMLU benchmark, greater than a 7% improvement over Gopher.

Simulating Human Memory with Language Models

Language models are increasingly being deployed as user simulators, but their memory is far more reliable than that of real users. To measure this gap, we run a series of classic memory...

Mapping the Mind of a Large Language Model

We have identified how millions of concepts are represented inside Claude Sonnet, one of our deployed large language models. This is the first ever detailed look inside a modern, production-grade large language model.

How linguistics learned to stop worrying and love the language models

Language models (LMs) can produce fluent, grammatical text. Nonetheless, some maintain that language models don’t really learn language and also, even if they did, that would not be informative for the study of human learning and processing. On the other side, there have been claims that the success of LMs obviates the need for studying linguistic theory and structure. We argue that both extremes are wrong. LMs can contribute to fundamental questions about linguistic structure, language processing, and learning. They force us to rethink arguments and ways of thinking that have been foundational in linguistics. While they do not replace linguistic structure and theory, they serve as model systems and working proofs of concept for gradient, usage-based approaches to language. We offer an optimistic take on the relationship between language models and linguistics.

Understanding Understanding: A Pragmatic Framework Motivated by...

Motivated by the rapid ascent of Large Language Models (LLMs) and debates about the extent to which they possess human-level qualities, we propose a framework for testing whether any agent (be it...

Jailbreaking Large Language Models: If You Torture the Model Long Enough, It Will Confess!

A Cautionary Tale…

How To Scale Your Model

Training LLMs often feels like alchemy, but understanding and optimizing the performance of your models doesn't have to. This book aims to demystify the science of scaling language models: how TPUs (and GPUs) work and how they communicate with each other, how LLMs run on real hardware, and how to parallelize your models during training and inference so they run efficiently at massive scale. If you've ever wondered “how expensive should this LLM be to train” or “how much memory do I need to serve this model myself” or “what's an AllGather”, we hope this will be useful to you.

The Philosophy of Language Models

ABSTRACT The success of large language models (LLMs) across many domains of AI research has generated intense debate. Some attribute their impressive performance on complex tasks to human‐like linguistic and cognitive capacities, whereas others ascribe it to shallow pattern matching. These disputes stem from deep‐seated philosophical disagreements about the nature of language and cognition. We provide an opinionated survey of these disagreements across core topics in the philosophy of mind and language, including syntactic competence, compositionality, linguistic meaning, representation, attitudes, reasoning, agency, and consciousness. We contend that progress on these issues requires not only clarity about background philosophical commitments but also, in many cases, close engagement with emerging empirical evidence.