Why the Valuable Capabilities of LLMs Are Precisely the Unexplainable Ones
Abstract
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.
Cite
@article{arxiv.2603.15238,
title = {Why the Valuable Capabilities of LLMs Are Precisely the Unexplainable Ones},
author = {Quan Cheng},
journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:2603.15238},
year = {2026}
}
Comments
12 pages, v2: added correction to Polanyi on why tacit knowledge is tacit (structural vs quantitative), unified three independent intellectual threads (Smolensky, Dreyfus, dynamical systems theory)