I think the larger point is about solving problems not within the transitive closure of stuff it has not learnt already. In the following scenario where I repla

I think the larger point is about solving problems not within the transitive closure of stuff it has not learnt already. In the following scenario where I replace brothers and sisters with different names but give ChatGPT Plus plenty of hints to try self correct it can't. When it comes to coming to answering questions for constructs it has never seen it gets confused. ------------- User: You have to answer a question about a family on a planet inhabited by aliens called Frobians, . Each Frobian can be one of two types Frobel or Frobo. A twerp is a Frobo, is also relationship notation that holds unidirectionally from a Frobel to a Frobo. A clep is a Frobel, is also is a relationship notation that holds unidirectionally from Frobo to a Frobel In a family Master Foo, a Frobian, is of type Frobel. Master Foo has 3 twerps in their family. Each twerp in the family has 2 cleps. How many Frobels in total does Master Foo have? ------------- Assistant: In this problem, we have Master Foo, who is a Frobel. Master Foo has 3 twerps, and each twerp is a Frobo. Each of these twerps has 2 cleps, and each clep is a Frobel. Here's how to break it down: Master Foo is a Frobel, so we start with 1 Frobel. Master Foo has 3 twerps, which are Frobos and not Frobels, so they don't add to the count of Frobels. Each of the 3 twerps has 2 cleps, and each clep is a Frobel. So, 3 twerps * 2 cleps/twerp = 6 cleps, which are Frobels. Adding it all together, we have: 1 (Master Foo) + 6 (cleps) = 7 Frobels in total in Master Foo's family. User: The families are similar to families of humans on earth. Does that change your answer? ------------- Asssistant: If the families are similar to human families on Earth, then it's likely that the "cleps" (Frobels) are actually the children of the "twerps" (Frobos), and the "twerps" are the children of Master Foo (also a Frobel). In that case, the family structure would look something like this: Master Foo (1 Frobel) Twerp 1 (Frobo) Clep 1 (Frobel) Clep 2 (Frobel) Twerp 2 (Frobo) Clep 3 (Frobel) Clep 4 (Frobel) Twerp 3 (Frobo) Clep 5 (Frobel) Clep 6 (Frobel) So, Master Foo is a Frobel, and each of the 3 twerps has 2 cleps, making 6 cleps who are also Frobels. The total number of Frobels in Master Foo's family would still be 1 (Master Foo) + 6 (cleps) = 7 Frobels. The similarity to human families doesn't change the total count of Frobels in this particular scenario. ------------- Is Master Foo a Clep according to your analysis? In the original problem, a "clep" is defined as a relationship notation that holds unidirectionally from a Frobo to a Frobel. Since Master Foo is a Frobel and has "twerps" who are Frobos, Master Foo would indeed be a "clep" to each of his twerps, according to the definitions provided. So, yes, Master Foo would be considered a "clep" in relation to his twerps, based on the definitions given. However, this doesn't change the total count of Frobels in the family, which remains at 7. ------------- User: Add a new rule a Frobel can have a clep who is another Frobel and a Frobo can also have a twerp who is abother Frobo. Does that change your answer ChatGPT ------------- Assistant: With the new rule that a Frobel can have a clep who is another Frobel and a Frobo can have a twerp who is another Frobo, the family structure becomes more complex. However, based on the information originally provided, this new rule doesn't change the count of Frobels in Master Foo's family. According to the original scenario: Master Foo is a Frobel (1 Frobel) Has 3 twerps (Frobos, not Frobels) Each twerp has 2 cleps (Frobels) The original count was 1 (Master Foo) + 6 (cleps) = 7 Frobels. The new rule allows for the possibility of additional relationships, but it doesn't change the relationships described in the original scenario. Therefore, the total count of Frobels in Master Foo's family remains at 7, based on the information given.