In a statement made by Google, it was stated that PaLM 2 is much better at a number of text-based tasks, including reasoning, encoding and translation. It was underlined that PaLM 2 can understand idioms in different languages (For example, ringing skirts). In a research paper describing PaLM 2’s capabilities, Google engineers stated that the system’s language proficiency was “sufficient to teach that language”, partly due to the higher prevalence of non-English text in the training data.
PaLM 2 has many custom configurations
Like other major language models that take a lot of time and resources to create, PaLM 2 is not a single product, but rather a product family with different versions to be used in consumer and corporate environments. The system is available in four sizes, from smallest to largest, namely Gecko, Otter, Bison and Unicorn.
Med-PaLM 2, reportedly a health data-trained version of PaLM 2, can answer questions similar to those found in the US Medical Licensing Exam at the “expert” level. Another version (Sec-PaLM 2) trained on cybersecurity data can also explain the behavior of potentially malicious scripts and help detect threats in the code. Both of these models will initially be available to select customers via Google Cloud.
In Google’s case, PaLM 2 is already used in 25 services, including the company’s experimental chatbot Bard. Updates available through Bard include improved coding capabilities and more language support. It’s also used to power features in Google Workspace apps like Docs, Slides, and Sheets.
PaLM 2 may come to smartphones
However, miniaturization of such language models is very important. Because these giant systems are quite expensive to run in the cloud, but running on the device will also allow for other benefits, such as enhanced privacy. The problem is that smaller versions of language models inevitably end up being less capable than their larger siblings.
While PaLM 2 is certainly a step forward for Google’s work on AI language models, known issues and concerns remain. For example, some experts have begun to question the legality of training data used to build language models. This data is usually collected from the internet and often contains copyright-protected texts and pirated e-books. The tech companies that build these models often refuse to answer questions about where they source their training data. There are also inherent problems with the output of language models, such as “hallucination” or the tendency of these systems to simply fabricate information.