Well it actually CAN execute the reasoning in natural language (see my other post). You just need to set very strict constraints, because as you point out: espe

Well it actually CAN execute the reasoning in natural language (see my other post). You just need to set very strict constraints, because as you point out: especially 4o will really prefer to hare off at the first nearest pattern match. (I hate 4o's tuning). I mean, we'd get a similar outcome if we first give a human child this problem, and then subsequently hand them an ice-cream. "Clearly the child isn't reasoning or creating the way that adults reason, it's off eating an ice cream". :-P We can debate whether the machine is smart, or whether natural language requires some level of reasoning as part of the <syntax>. (compare: the type system in rust) . We can even debate whether knowing natural language thus makes the machine smart. %-/ -- edit: Turns out GPT-4 (plain) can solve the question if you warn it upfront, and Claude actually recognizes the trap and then solves it. So I guess we've demonstrated that both AI and humans can jump to conclusions based on incomplete or assumed information.