The o1 model is hit and miss for me. On one hand it has solved the NYT Connections game [0] each day I've tried it [1]. Other models, including Claude Sonnet 3.

The o1 model is hit and miss for me. On one hand it has solved the NYT Connections game [0] each day I've tried it [1]. Other models, including Claude Sonnet 3.5 cannot. But on the other hand it misses important detail and hallucinates, just like GPT-4o. And can need a lot of hand holding and correction to get to the right answer, so much so that sometimes you wonder if it would have been easier to just do it yourself. Only this time it's worse because you're waiting 20-60 seconds for an answer. I wonder if what it excels at is just the stuff that I don't need it for. I'm not in classic STEM, I'm in software engineering, and o1 isn't so much better that it justifies the wait time (yet). One area I haven't explored is using it to plan implementation or architectural changes. I feel like it might be better for this, but need the right problems to throw at it. [0] https://www.nytimes.com/games/connections https://www.nytimes.com/games/connections [1] https://chatgpt.com/share/66e40d64-6f70-8004-9fe5-83dd3653a573 https://chatgpt.com/share/66e40d64-6f70-8004-9fe5-83dd3653a5...