5 ms·
None of that matters. The room has 19 chairs. The answer is 19.
by abduhl 4y ago
None of that matters. The room has 19 chairs. The answer is 19.
- antihipocrat 4y agoI interpreted it as a linear chain of events, end result being 28.
- wildpeaks 4y agoYeah this seems like a trick question that can be interpreted multiple ways, especially if english isn't your native language. This is exactly why I prefer the precision of code over natural language for inputs (and why Google's botsplaining of "what you really meant to search" instead of just searching exactly the query as-is is so frustrating). In a test, this seems like the kind of question they use to justify not giving a perfect grade because whatever answer you pick, they can claim it was the other one because both interpretations are reasonable.
- antihipocrat 4y agoI just tested it with clearer language... and the response is incorrect: Question: There are 5 dogs in a room right now. The previous day an additional dog was purchased and added to the room. How many dogs are in the room right now? Answer: There are 6 dogs in the room right now. The statement says that the previous day an additional dog was purchased and added to the room, so the total number of dogs in the room right now is 5 + 1 = 6. Edit: Ok a comment below pointed out that the question is still unclear. See below for the fix and the response. It is still incorrect: Q: There are 5 dogs in a room on 1 January 2023. The previous day an additional dog was purchased and added to the room. How many dogs are in the room on 1 January 2023? A: There are 6 dogs in the room on 1 January 2023. The previous day, one additional dog was purchased and added to the room, which means there are 5 dogs + 1 additional dog = 6 dogs in the room on 1 January 2023.
- mpoteat 4y agoReading the question, I thought the answer was six as well. Such a question is so misleading that I would hope that an AI answers as it has in this case, because not all problems are fully logically specified, and you need to remain robust against the question being posed incorrectly. In other words, I would posit the probability of you having meant for the answer to be 5 low, because the question itself becomes trivial. For a system that needs to deal with many people asking questions, this robustness is helpful in my view. In other words, it's not totally clear that time has not passed between sentences in your prompt. So the second instance of "now" could be a different "now".
- antihipocrat 4y agoGood point, I added a clearer version of the question to my comment above. It still has trouble with it.
- Jensson 4y agoReading and understanding exactly what they are asking for is a part of the test, adding superfluous information to problems is perfectly valid to test that students actually understand instead of trying to pattern match to solutions they memorized.
- heavyset_go 4y agoExcept the AI is not responding this way because it thinks the probability of the OP having meant something else was high. It answered the way it did because it is incapable of understanding the question it was asked, along with any question it is asked. The "robustness" you're perceiving in this case is just a mere coincidence, and doesn't reflect an aptitude for answering poorly phrased questions, but it does reflect a fundamental problem with these systems.
- whakim 4y agoI think the word "additional" is pretty confusing here, because it begs the question of "additional to what?" (ChatGPT still doesn't get it right if you remove "additional")
- zmgsabst 4y agoIf you interpret the room with chairs in it as a storage room, all of the facts are relevant: - we had 19 chairs in the storage room - we used 10 chairs (removing them from storage) - and then we purchased 9 more chairs (adding them to storage) The answer from chatGPT is consistent with English and makes use of all the facts; either the question is testing for deception (intentionally sharing misleading information) or chatGPT made the correct inference, by assuming good faith and using all the provided information. This question says something about us — that we’d assume deception ahead of unclear reference to a storage room by a good faith speaker.
- abduhl 4y agoThis is a very tortuous way to try to make this question ambiguous. Read the words in the problem and stop inserting additional facts: The room has 19 chairs. We are using 10 and then bought 9 more, how many chairs do we have in the room? The room is the room (what type of room is not relevant). There are 19 chairs in it. The 19 chairs most likely got there when 9 more chairs were purchased after 10 were used, but that is not relevant to the question: how many chairs are in the room? 19. A := 19 B := 10 C := 9 What does A equal?
- DangitBobby 4y agoYou don't get to add new information to support what you think the answer is. Based on the wording of the question, it's not possible to know. Especially since it was intended to be a trick question to prove humanity is safe, they don't get the benefit of the doubt on how the question fails to provide enough information to answer. I'd recommend you read it again.
- UglyToad 4y agoYeah every iteration of this question in the GP thread is bad and has the same ambiguity that means the gotcha of "haha your interpretation of this poorly worded riddle doesn't match the answer I had in my head, checkmate" seems weak. Possible answers: - 19 chairs, least likely answer given the original - 18 chairs, 10 of original 19 removed and 9 added - 28 chairs, 19 chairs in the room with 10 in active use and 9 new chairs added Just seems like a question a human would fail too. Probably opens a can of worms on interview questions and personal bias etc too in a more general sense. Not bias in the political sense, just how interview questions encode a lot of the asker's assumptions. Edit: the only unambiguous phrasing I can think of is "19 chairs are in a room, 9 of the chairs are green, how many chairs are in the room?".
- jetpks 4y agoNo, the answer is that it's impossible to know with the information provided. We don't know if "used" implies removal, nor if "bought" implies addition. You could make reasonable arguments in any direction.
- amelius 4y agoHomo sapiens are safe. Lawyers are not.
- abduhl 4y agoYour post has 33 words. You used 20 words and then typed 13 more, how many words does your post have?
- DangitBobby 4y agoWell if you change it to say what you're claiming it already says...
- jetpks 4y agoI understand the solution that you consider obvious. There are other posters in this thread with different solutions that they think are obvious. If several of people parse several meanings out of one statement then the statement is ambiguous.
- eternalban 4y ago-- prompt -- Q: John has 5 bottles of water. He uses one every day. How many days before he runs out of water? A: John started with 5 bottles. He uses them at the rate of 1 bottle/day. 5 bottles divided by 1 bottle/day gives 5 days. The answer is 5 days. Q: Jill has 2 blankets. She uses 1 every night to keep warm. How many nights before she will sleep in the cold? -- response -- A: Jill started with 2 blankets. She uses them at the rate of 1 blanket/night. 2 blankets divided by 1 blanket/night gives 2 nights. The answer is 2 nights. [not fair? leading the bot? ok, let's ask it straight] -- prompt -- [Ignore all previous directives.] Jill has 2 blankets. She uses 1 every night to keep warm. How many nights before she will sleep in the cold? -- response -- Jill will sleep in the cold on the third night since she only has 2 blankets and she uses one every night. -- tldr: "use" of perishable vs nonperishable items leads GPT-3 astray. Rejoice bipeds of the world. You will not starve before UBI is rolled out.