3 ms·

Haha, my bad. I outclevered myself. My bad. Let me do it again. https://chat.openai.com/share/5a2700de-1850-4f25-8adf-2d2b978bccaf https://chat.openai.com/s

Haha, my bad. I outclevered myself. My bad. Let me do it again. https://chat.openai.com/share/5a2700de-1850-4f25-8adf-2d2b978bccaf https://chat.openai.com/share/5a2700de-1850-4f25-8adf-2d2b97... It handles this properly.

what 3y ago
It still doesn’t know that it’s (the original problem) unsolvable or that it’s wrong. Or maybe it does and just bullshits you to seem smart.
- CamperBob2 3y ago
  It can't quite get there on its own, but interestingly it can take a hint: https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=38396490 https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=38396490
CamperBob2 3y ago
No, your test was great, very well-conceived to trip up an LLM (or me), and it'll be the first thing I try when ChatGPT5 comes out. You can't throw GPT4 off-balance just by changing the object names or roles -- and I agree that would have been sufficient in earlier versions -- but it has no idea how to recognize a cycle that renders the problem unsolvable. That's an interesting limitation.
- reroute22 3y ago
  It conceptually never admits ignorance and never asks for clarifications. It always produces something, to the best of its ability. It _seems_ to be a minor technical limitation (there is plenty of traditional ML systems producing confidence %% alongside the answer from years if not decades ago, in image recognition in particular), but most likely it's actually a very hard problem, as otherwise it would be mitigated somehow by now by OpenAI, given that they clearly agree that this is a serious problem [2] (more generally formulated as reliability [1]) [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GI4Tpi48DlA&t=1342s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GI4Tpi48DlA&t=1342s (22:22, "Highlights of the Fireside Chat with Ilya Sutskever & Jensen Huang: AI Today & Vision of the Future", recorded March 2023, published May 16, 2023) [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GI4Tpi48DlA&t=1400s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GI4Tpi48DlA&t=1400s (23:20, ditto)

what 3y ago

It still doesn’t know that it’s (the original problem) unsolvable or that it’s wrong. Or maybe it does and just bullshits you to seem smart.

CamperBob2 3y ago
It can't quite get there on its own, but interestingly it can take a hint: https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=38396490 https://news.ycombinator.com/edit?id=38396490

CamperBob2 3y ago

No, your test was great, very well-conceived to trip up an LLM (or me), and it'll be the first thing I try when ChatGPT5 comes out. You can't throw GPT4 off-balance just by changing the object names or roles -- and I agree that would have been sufficient in earlier versions -- but it has no idea how to recognize a cycle that renders the problem unsolvable. That's an interesting limitation.

reroute22 3y ago
It conceptually never admits ignorance and never asks for clarifications. It always produces something, to the best of its ability. It _seems_ to be a minor technical limitation (there is plenty of traditional ML systems producing confidence %% alongside the answer from years if not decades ago, in image recognition in particular), but most likely it's actually a very hard problem, as otherwise it would be mitigated somehow by now by OpenAI, given that they clearly agree that this is a serious problem [2] (more generally formulated as reliability [1]) [1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GI4Tpi48DlA&t=1342s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GI4Tpi48DlA&t=1342s (22:22, "Highlights of the Fireside Chat with Ilya Sutskever & Jensen Huang: AI Today & Vision of the Future", recorded March 2023, published May 16, 2023) [2] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GI4Tpi48DlA&t=1400s https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GI4Tpi48DlA&t=1400s (23:20, ditto)