3 ms·
Even "thinking out loud" we have seen these systems fall flat on their face and give very wrong answers. Thinking out loud also only gets you so far, if the ex
by nerdjon 2y ago
Even "thinking out loud" we have seen these systems fall flat on their face and give very wrong answers.
Thinking out loud also only gets you so far, if the expectation is a certain type of response it can't always "think out loud". In reality that just proves it isn't really reasoning here and is more likely just self referencing.
That being said, I tried this personally allowing it to think out loud and it told me she has 212 sisters. Using your exact prompt.
- Closi 2y ago> Thinking out loud also only gets you so far, if the expectation is a certain type of response it can't always "think out loud". In reality that just proves it isn't really reasoning here and is more likely just self referencing. Try to calculate it without writing anything down, or thinking any numbers or words in your head. You can't draw a 1:1 analogue between an AI and the human experience, but remember that we have an internal stream of consciousness. Maybe the outputs of the LLM are more similar to the stream of consciousness in our heads rather than the words we say? After all, Humans also do lots of self referencing. > That being said, I tried this personally allowing it to think out loud and it told me she has 212 sisters. Using your exact prompt. Fair enough, but worst case it can often solve it correctly with the correct reasoning. GPT3.5 can't solve it correctly with correct reasoning, so we are at least appearing to be on a path where AI's can start to solve this question, albeit potentially not fully reliably.