3 ms·
> even the number of letters in words. This one isn't surprising at all: it doesn't deal with letters, but symbols. It only indirectly knows about spelling.
by mlyle 4y ago
> even the number of letters in words.
This one isn't surprising at all: it doesn't deal with letters, but symbols. It only indirectly knows about spelling.
> In contrast, its ability to explain grammar is terrible. It misidentifies parts of speech, singulars and plurals, the subjects and objects of verbs,
I wonder if this is an area where having to generate word-by-word an immediate final answer immediately is killing it, and if it could be induced to "diagram" a sentence first and get a correct answer. Can you give me an example of the query you're asking?
- tkgally 4y ago> This one isn't surprising at all: it doesn't deal with letters, but symbols. It’s not surprising to us now. It was very surprising to me when I first noticed it, as it contrasted sharply with ChatGPT’s ability to explain aspects of language that seem to us humans as being much more difficult, particularly word meaning. > Can you give me an example of the query you're asking? I have to admit that all of my testing of its grammar-explaining ability was done last December. I have repeated a few of those tests now with GPT-4, and it did fine [1]. [1] https://www.gally.net/temp/202212chatgpt/explaininggrammar.html https://www.gally.net/temp/202212chatgpt/explaininggrammar.h...
- lucubratory 3y ago>I have to admit that all of my testing of its grammar-explaining ability was done last December. I have repeated a few of those tests now with GPT-4, and it did fine [1]. A tale as old as time in this space! I appreciate you checking it again. They are improving so fast.