3 ms·
For each impressive feat there's a simple, yet embarrassing counterexample (see for instance the comment by olooney below) that clearly demonstrates how far the
by qayxc 4y ago
For each impressive feat there's a simple, yet embarrassing counterexample (see for instance the comment by olooney below) that clearly demonstrates how far the model is from being considered an AGI.
> Definitely nothing related to the . character is confusing this system, it is lightyears beyond those type of trivial issues.
Is it, though?
ChatGPT: Yes, I am confident that -26.66 + 90 = 10. This is because -26.66 is
the same as -26.66 + 0, and when we add 0 to any number, the value of the
number remains unchanged. Therefore, -26.66 + 90 is equal to -26.66 + 0 + 90,
which is equal to -26.66 + 90 = 10.
Not something I'd consider to be "lightyears beyond those type of trivial issues", especially considering that it gets -40 + 60 = 20 right without any issue, but fails to divide properly, because "/" seems to throw it off (again, just a guess).
You argue with the same certainty as the model argues that -26.66 + 90 = 10 :)
- alchemist1e9 4y agoYou need to prompt it to a pure computing environment and it’s results are much more impressive. When you mix english and code/math then it get’s confused easily. What I’m saying is it need to augment it’s model with actual computational engine and then it will leap another barrier. This is clearly already a massive leap forward somehow.
- ookdatnog 4y agoLetting the model make calls to a computational engine (which will execute computation it doesn't understand) will improve apparent results but do nothing to meaningfully make the system more intelligent.