To clarify: The authors/Stanford used this exact stated/non-question title for their press release: https://hai.stanford.edu/news/ais-ostensible-emergent-abilities-are-mirage, which ended up also being the title of the previous post on !artificial_intel@lemmy.ml. As already noted by @huginn@feddit.it, this “AI’s Ostensible” title is therefore well in line with the paper’s actual conclusion, that is refuting current claims of emergence. And I picked the “AI’s Ostensible” title being from the authors/their employer, for clarity (especially when quoted inside a larger Lemmy post title), and continuity with the previous post.

It is clear to anyone who used them and understand the task they were trained on, […]

Yet where is the proof? This is the exact wishy-washy way of not substantiating a claim, which this paper investigated and have refuted.

[…] that LLMs do have emergent abilities.

I think you should really not drop that sentence immediately in front of your quite selective quote — the authors put it in emphasis for good reasons:

Ergo, emergent abilities may be creations of the researcher’s choices, not a fundamental property of the model family on the specific task.

So regarding “emergent abilities,” it is quite clear the authors argue that from their analysis, if at all, cherry-picked metrics carry these “emergent abilities,” not LLMs.