8 ms·
https://chatgpt.com/share/672331d2-676c-8002-b8b3-10fc4c8d8896 https://chatgpt.com/share/672331d2-676c-8002-b8b3-10fc4c8d88... In my experience, if you confuse
by mavidser 2y ago
https://chatgpt.com/share/672331d2-676c-8002-b8b3-10fc4c8d8896 https://chatgpt.com/share/672331d2-676c-8002-b8b3-10fc4c8d88...
In my experience, if you confuse an LLM by deviating from the the "expected", then all the shims of logic seem to disappear, and it goes into hallucination mode.
- danielmarkbruce 2y agoTry asking this question to a bunch of adults.
- mavidser 2y agoTbf that was exactly my point. An adult might use 'inference' and 'reasoning' to ask clarification, or go with an internal logic of their choosing. ChatGPT here went with a lexigraphical order in Python for some reason, and then proceeded to make false statements from false observations, while also defying its own internal logic. "six" > "ten" is true because "six" comes after "ten" alphabetically. No. "ten" > "seven" is false because "ten" comes before "seven" alphabetically. No. From what I understand of LLMs (which - I admit - is not very much), logical reasoning isn't a property of LLMs, unlike information retrieval. I'm sure this problem can be solved at some point, but a good solution would need development of many more kinds of inference and logic engines than there are today.
- deleted 2y ago[deleted]