> I can’t use the times it gets the logic puzzle right, as evidence that it understood the puzzle. No this is bias from your end. It really depends on the puzz

> I can’t use the times it gets the logic puzzle right, as evidence that it understood the puzzle. No this is bias from your end. It really depends on the puzzle. You need to give it a puzzle with trillions of possible answers. In this case if it gets a right answer even once the probability is so low for this to happen by chance that it means an aspect of the model understands the concept; While another aspect of the model doesn't understand it. It's possible for even humans to have contradictory thinking and desires. Therefore a claim cannot be made that it understands nothing.