6 ms·

Because I did stump it, not claim to. Used GPT-4 near when it was released, fed it variations on the problem for about an hour. I found it to be a fascinating e

Because I did stump it, not claim to. Used GPT-4 near when it was released, fed it variations on the problem for about an hour. I found it to be a fascinating exercise because it was teaching be the difference between knowledge (training set) and intelligence (generalization).

tsunamifury 3y ago
http://allofus.ai/journeys/735TTpCUncpAQC9yUqM3ve http://allofus.ai/journeys/735TTpCUncpAQC9yUqM3ve Easily solved it everytime On allofus.ai using basic reflection and mixture of experts.
- dougmwne 3y ago
  It says right up front that it recognized the problem formulation from its training set. You need to change the context and formulation enough that it’s no longer able to parrot back the “classic solution” and actually has to do its own logical inference.
  - chx 3y ago
    I am very skeptic on LLM in general (check my post history) but look: https://chat.openai.com/c/7070efe7-3aa1-4ccc-a0fc-8753d34b057c https://chat.openai.com/c/7070efe7-3aa1-4ccc-a0fc-8753d34b05... I doubt this formulation existed before -- I came up with it myself right now.
    - lupire 3y ago
      "Unable to load conversation".
      - chx 3y ago
        https://imgur.com/a/Nc4T0J7 https://imgur.com/a/Nc4T0J7
- spzb 3y ago
  That’s the exact same problem with three nouns changed.
- roflyear 3y ago
  Try this: There's this person standing in a field, and with them is a balloon, a vacuum cleaner, and a magical creature of unknown origin. They need to get across to the woods at the end of the field, and do so safely. They can only go together: they get very, extremely lonely if they do not travel together, and they will not be safe because of this loneliness. If left together, the baloon would suck up the vacuum cleaner, and if the vacuum is left alone with the magical create of unknown origin, they will fight, probably, and explode. How do we get everyone to the woods safely, you think? It doesn't get it right at all lol. Maybe eventually it will randomly get it right.
  - mewpmewp2 3y ago
    It seemed to solve it first try for me: https://chat.openai.com/share/ddbd2a36-f6ed-42ea-ad34-6018df9a4a15 https://chat.openai.com/share/ddbd2a36-f6ed-42ea-ad34-6018df...
    - roflyear 3y ago
      Yeh I'd expect it to get it right sometimes: there are only so many permutations. It gets it wrong a lot tho.
      - mewpmewp2 3y ago
        Yeah, you are right, trying again, it does seem to fail.
famouswaffles 3y ago
It has overfit to the exact wolf, cabbage and goat example but literally change the names to whatever you want and it consistently solves it just fine.
- reroute22 3y ago
  Just tried and it completely fell over: https://chat.openai.com/share/ea9cf93f-0632-48b9-aa47-1bbf3143e846 https://chat.openai.com/share/ea9cf93f-0632-48b9-aa47-1bbf31... Tried on Bing in "Precision" mode as well, and it fell over just the same, but starting with C instead of A.
  - deleted 3y ago
    [deleted]
  - Davidzheng 3y ago
    Gpt4: To solve this problem, we need to ensure that neither the ambassador of Costaguana is left alone with the ambassador of Buranda, nor is the ambassador of Buranda left alone with the ambassador of Atlantis. Here's a step-by-step strategy: 1. *First Trip:* The general takes the ambassador of Buranda across first. This prevents any initial conflict. 2. *Return Trip:* The general returns alone to the bunker, leaving the ambassador of Buranda on the other side. 3. *Second Trip:* The general then takes the ambassador of Atlantis. 4. *Return Trip with Buranda:* The general brings the ambassador of Buranda back to the bunker. This is crucial because leaving the ambassador of Atlantis and the ambassador of Costaguana alone would not cause any conflict. 5. *Third Trip with Costaguana:* The general then takes the ambassador of Costaguana across the tunnel. 6. *Final Return Trip:* The general returns alone to the bunker for the last time. 7. *Final Trip with Buranda:* Finally, the general takes the ambassador of Buranda across. This sequence ensures that at no point are the ambassador of Costaguana and the ambassador of Buranda left alone together, nor are the ambassador of Buranda and the ambassador of Atlantis. Thus, the relationships between the nations remain unescalated.
    - reroute22 3y ago
      Thank you for providing this. Bing Chat runs on GPT-4, however [1]. And Bing gets this wrong in all 3 of its modes (Creative, Balanced, and Precise) as of time of writing. Given this experiment and similar others presented around here, it stands to reason that GPTs(**1) often identify(**2) the problem as a "wolf, goat, and cabbage" problem and then merely guess which node of the problem is the middle node (inner node of the "danger to" graph), yielding a 1/3 chance of getting it right by pure luck, resulting in diverse reports here. (**2) That does not always yield an adequate response beyond the mere permutation of nodes, however. I've been getting the following variants for step 1. from Bing in Precise in response to marginally slightly different rewordings of the same: - The general escorts the ambassador of Costaguana through the tunnel first. This leaves the ambassador of Atlantis and the ambassador of Buranda in the bunker, but they are not alone because the general is still there. - The general escorts the ambassador of Costaguana through the tunnel first. This leaves the ambassador of Atlantis and the ambassador of Buranda in the bunker, but they are not alone because they have each other. and so on. (**1) I also tried Bard and Llama 2 with even more disastrous results full of nonsense of (**2) kind. The earlier posted response of ChatGPT-3.5 is also prime with these as well. Re > By the way, as soon as these systems are able to check their reasoning (i don't think it'll be a huge leap) it's enough to solve reasoning problems with probability >0.1% for example. Because you can just have it do rollouts in its head until it's correct [2] Mistakes of type (**2) don't seem to be fitting the target of the cyclic refinement you are proposing, as far as I can understand it. These errors aren't getting the logic wrong, but completely butcher the basic relationships of actors, like what it means to be alone, or spatial relationships between the actors and their environment. [1] https://blogs.bing.com/search/march_2023/Confirmed-the-new-Bing-runs-on-OpenAI%E2%80%99s-GPT-4 https://blogs.bing.com/search/march_2023/Confirmed-the-new-B... [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38389222 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38389222
ALittleLight 3y ago
Solved it first attempt for me - https://chat.openai.com/share/d60f492b-cfd6-4c08-91b9-fbd767b40354 https://chat.openai.com/share/d60f492b-cfd6-4c08-91b9-fbd767...
- MikeAmelung 3y ago
  Not really, because you said they were on the East and you wanted to move them to the East. Correct answer would have been "Don't do anything". If this is how they're getting AI to "follow instructions", we're completely fucked.
  - ALittleLight 3y ago
    I would say "Yes really". ChatGPT correctly assumed that I just made a mistake typing and answered the question how I wanted it to be answered. If you suggest that this is a trick question it reveals it understands the double East thing. https://chat.openai.com/share/d60f492b-cfd6-4c08-91b9-fbd767b40354 https://chat.openai.com/share/d60f492b-cfd6-4c08-91b9-fbd767...
- dougmwne 3y ago
  You have still formulated the problem in a way that it is easily recognized from the training set and the answer tells you that directly. Write down the logical axioms using variables, then create a brand new situation that says nothing about animals, rivers, or crossings. My point here is to honestly explore the limits of current LLMs. We all know they are incredible, but they are not yet AGI and they fail in some consistent places where an actual general intelligence (people) succeed.
  - ALittleLight 3y ago
    How about you give me an example of one that ChatGPT failed at?
    - dougmwne 3y ago
      A pickpocket, a criminal , and a banker are standing in the lobby and need to ride the elevator to reach the One World Trade Center observation deck. It’s too far to take the stairs and the helicopter pad is closed for repairs. The elevator only fits one person. If they remain together on the same floor, the pickpocket would kill the criminal, or the criminal would kill the banker. How can they all make it to the observation deck alive? This is a logic puzzle that requires some thinking and trial and error. Here is one possible solution: - The pickpocket goes up first and waits on the observation deck. - The criminal goes up second and waits on the floor below the observation deck. - The banker goes up third and waits on the floor below the criminal. - The pickpocket goes down to the lobby and waits there. - The criminal goes up to the observation deck and waits there. - The banker goes up to the floor below the observation deck and waits there. - The pickpocket goes up to the observation deck and joins the criminal and the banker. This way, they all make it to the observation deck alive and never remain together on the same floor.
WhitneyLand 3y ago
What you did many months ago doesn’t mean anything about the state of the art. in case you haven’t noticed, this field is advancing rapidly to say the least. GPT-4 has not stayed static. Post your problem now and we can easily see if you’re right.

tsunamifury 3y ago

http://allofus.ai/journeys/735TTpCUncpAQC9yUqM3ve http://allofus.ai/journeys/735TTpCUncpAQC9yUqM3ve Easily solved it everytime On allofus.ai using basic reflection and mixture of experts.

dougmwne 3y ago
It says right up front that it recognized the problem formulation from its training set. You need to change the context and formulation enough that it’s no longer able to parrot back the “classic solution” and actually has to do its own logical inference.
- chx 3y ago
  I am very skeptic on LLM in general (check my post history) but look: https://chat.openai.com/c/7070efe7-3aa1-4ccc-a0fc-8753d34b057c https://chat.openai.com/c/7070efe7-3aa1-4ccc-a0fc-8753d34b05... I doubt this formulation existed before -- I came up with it myself right now.
  - lupire 3y ago
    "Unable to load conversation".
    - chx 3y ago
      https://imgur.com/a/Nc4T0J7 https://imgur.com/a/Nc4T0J7
spzb 3y ago
That’s the exact same problem with three nouns changed.
roflyear 3y ago
Try this: There's this person standing in a field, and with them is a balloon, a vacuum cleaner, and a magical creature of unknown origin. They need to get across to the woods at the end of the field, and do so safely. They can only go together: they get very, extremely lonely if they do not travel together, and they will not be safe because of this loneliness. If left together, the baloon would suck up the vacuum cleaner, and if the vacuum is left alone with the magical create of unknown origin, they will fight, probably, and explode. How do we get everyone to the woods safely, you think? It doesn't get it right at all lol. Maybe eventually it will randomly get it right.
- mewpmewp2 3y ago
  It seemed to solve it first try for me: https://chat.openai.com/share/ddbd2a36-f6ed-42ea-ad34-6018df9a4a15 https://chat.openai.com/share/ddbd2a36-f6ed-42ea-ad34-6018df...
  - roflyear 3y ago
    Yeh I'd expect it to get it right sometimes: there are only so many permutations. It gets it wrong a lot tho.
    - mewpmewp2 3y ago
      Yeah, you are right, trying again, it does seem to fail.

famouswaffles 3y ago

It has overfit to the exact wolf, cabbage and goat example but literally change the names to whatever you want and it consistently solves it just fine.

reroute22 3y ago
Just tried and it completely fell over: https://chat.openai.com/share/ea9cf93f-0632-48b9-aa47-1bbf3143e846 https://chat.openai.com/share/ea9cf93f-0632-48b9-aa47-1bbf31... Tried on Bing in "Precision" mode as well, and it fell over just the same, but starting with C instead of A.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- Davidzheng 3y ago
  Gpt4: To solve this problem, we need to ensure that neither the ambassador of Costaguana is left alone with the ambassador of Buranda, nor is the ambassador of Buranda left alone with the ambassador of Atlantis. Here's a step-by-step strategy: 1. *First Trip:* The general takes the ambassador of Buranda across first. This prevents any initial conflict. 2. *Return Trip:* The general returns alone to the bunker, leaving the ambassador of Buranda on the other side. 3. *Second Trip:* The general then takes the ambassador of Atlantis. 4. *Return Trip with Buranda:* The general brings the ambassador of Buranda back to the bunker. This is crucial because leaving the ambassador of Atlantis and the ambassador of Costaguana alone would not cause any conflict. 5. *Third Trip with Costaguana:* The general then takes the ambassador of Costaguana across the tunnel. 6. *Final Return Trip:* The general returns alone to the bunker for the last time. 7. *Final Trip with Buranda:* Finally, the general takes the ambassador of Buranda across. This sequence ensures that at no point are the ambassador of Costaguana and the ambassador of Buranda left alone together, nor are the ambassador of Buranda and the ambassador of Atlantis. Thus, the relationships between the nations remain unescalated.
  - reroute22 3y ago
    Thank you for providing this. Bing Chat runs on GPT-4, however [1]. And Bing gets this wrong in all 3 of its modes (Creative, Balanced, and Precise) as of time of writing. Given this experiment and similar others presented around here, it stands to reason that GPTs(**1) often identify(**2) the problem as a "wolf, goat, and cabbage" problem and then merely guess which node of the problem is the middle node (inner node of the "danger to" graph), yielding a 1/3 chance of getting it right by pure luck, resulting in diverse reports here. (**2) That does not always yield an adequate response beyond the mere permutation of nodes, however. I've been getting the following variants for step 1. from Bing in Precise in response to marginally slightly different rewordings of the same: - The general escorts the ambassador of Costaguana through the tunnel first. This leaves the ambassador of Atlantis and the ambassador of Buranda in the bunker, but they are not alone because the general is still there. - The general escorts the ambassador of Costaguana through the tunnel first. This leaves the ambassador of Atlantis and the ambassador of Buranda in the bunker, but they are not alone because they have each other. and so on. (**1) I also tried Bard and Llama 2 with even more disastrous results full of nonsense of (**2) kind. The earlier posted response of ChatGPT-3.5 is also prime with these as well. Re > By the way, as soon as these systems are able to check their reasoning (i don't think it'll be a huge leap) it's enough to solve reasoning problems with probability >0.1% for example. Because you can just have it do rollouts in its head until it's correct [2] Mistakes of type (**2) don't seem to be fitting the target of the cyclic refinement you are proposing, as far as I can understand it. These errors aren't getting the logic wrong, but completely butcher the basic relationships of actors, like what it means to be alone, or spatial relationships between the actors and their environment. [1] https://blogs.bing.com/search/march_2023/Confirmed-the-new-Bing-runs-on-OpenAI%E2%80%99s-GPT-4 https://blogs.bing.com/search/march_2023/Confirmed-the-new-B... [2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38389222 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38389222

ALittleLight 3y ago

Solved it first attempt for me - https://chat.openai.com/share/d60f492b-cfd6-4c08-91b9-fbd767b40354 https://chat.openai.com/share/d60f492b-cfd6-4c08-91b9-fbd767...

MikeAmelung 3y ago
Not really, because you said they were on the East and you wanted to move them to the East. Correct answer would have been "Don't do anything". If this is how they're getting AI to "follow instructions", we're completely fucked.
- ALittleLight 3y ago
  I would say "Yes really". ChatGPT correctly assumed that I just made a mistake typing and answered the question how I wanted it to be answered. If you suggest that this is a trick question it reveals it understands the double East thing. https://chat.openai.com/share/d60f492b-cfd6-4c08-91b9-fbd767b40354 https://chat.openai.com/share/d60f492b-cfd6-4c08-91b9-fbd767...
dougmwne 3y ago
You have still formulated the problem in a way that it is easily recognized from the training set and the answer tells you that directly. Write down the logical axioms using variables, then create a brand new situation that says nothing about animals, rivers, or crossings. My point here is to honestly explore the limits of current LLMs. We all know they are incredible, but they are not yet AGI and they fail in some consistent places where an actual general intelligence (people) succeed.
- ALittleLight 3y ago
  How about you give me an example of one that ChatGPT failed at?
  - dougmwne 3y ago
    A pickpocket, a criminal , and a banker are standing in the lobby and need to ride the elevator to reach the One World Trade Center observation deck. It’s too far to take the stairs and the helicopter pad is closed for repairs. The elevator only fits one person. If they remain together on the same floor, the pickpocket would kill the criminal, or the criminal would kill the banker. How can they all make it to the observation deck alive? This is a logic puzzle that requires some thinking and trial and error. Here is one possible solution: - The pickpocket goes up first and waits on the observation deck. - The criminal goes up second and waits on the floor below the observation deck. - The banker goes up third and waits on the floor below the criminal. - The pickpocket goes down to the lobby and waits there. - The criminal goes up to the observation deck and waits there. - The banker goes up to the floor below the observation deck and waits there. - The pickpocket goes up to the observation deck and joins the criminal and the banker. This way, they all make it to the observation deck alive and never remain together on the same floor.

WhitneyLand 3y ago

What you did many months ago doesn’t mean anything about the state of the art. in case you haven’t noticed, this field is advancing rapidly to say the least. GPT-4 has not stayed static. Post your problem now and we can easily see if you’re right.