3 ms·

I’ve just tries GPT (again, after months) on high level pseudomathematics and it blabbers on and on about nonsense…

• cool_dude85 3y ago
  I dont know about the newer models but you used to be able to get authoritative sounding answers asking about "the fallacy of affirming the antecedent". So you don't need to be so high level.
  • pfortuny 3y ago
    Well, that is really good to know. I was just reassuring myself about its nonsense generation.
• dagw 3y ago
  Terrance Tao, who is a pretty good mathematician, made a post [1] not too long ago about how he found ChatGPT to be at least slightly useful for solving a non-trivial math problem. His basic insight is to not ask for an answer directly, but to ask auxiliary questions and for suggestions of how to approach the problem, which eventually lead him down the right path. Basically how you would discuss the problem with a colleague how didn't know the correct answer of the top of their head either. [1] https://mathstodon.xyz/@tao/110601051375142142 https://mathstodon.xyz/@tao/110601051375142142
  • jprete 3y ago
    Frankly this sounds very close to rubber-ducking. I'm sure LLMs throw out some creative seeds, but they're much better at coming up with creative ideas than truth. I think people are too used to getting creative ideas from other people, where the ideas are at least superficially useful, to understand that they're dealing with the world's best improvising rubber duck.