Why the Valuable Capabilities of LLMs Are Precisely the Unexplainable Ones
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
This paper proposes and argues for a counterintuitive thesis: the truly valuable capabilities of large language models (LLMs) reside precisely in the part that cannot be fully captured by human-readable discrete rules. The core argument is a proof by contradiction via expert system equivalence: if the full capabilities of an LLM could be described by a complete set of human-readable rules, then that rule set would be functionally equivalent to an expert system; but expert systems have been historically and empirically demonstrated to be strictly weaker than LLMs; therefore, a contradiction arises -- the capabilities of LLMs that exceed those of expert systems are exactly the capabilities that cannot be rule-encoded. This thesis is further supported by the Chinese philosophical concept of Wu (sudden insight through practice), the historical failure of expert systems, and a structural mismatch between human cognitive tools and complex systems. The paper discusses implications for interpretability research, AI safety, and scientific epistemology.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 5 of its 22 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 16 Mar 2026.
Builds on
5 of 22 references.
References · 5
- 2017Attention Is All You Needcited by 60,361
- 2013Efficient Estimation of Word Representations in Vector Spacecited by 4,375
- 2022Emergent Abilities of Large Language Modelscited by 2,512
- 2025The Limits of AI Explainability: An Algorithmic Information Theory Approachcited by 3
- 2024G"odel Incompleteness Theorem for PAC Learnable Theory from the view of complexity measurementcited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.