3 ms·
Sorry, I'm in a rush, could only afford a couple minutes looking at it, but I'm missing something: Google: 2.385511e+39 Your chat: "Numerically, that’s about 2
by refulgentis 2y ago
Sorry, I'm in a rush, could only afford a couple minutes looking at it, but I'm missing something:
Google: 2.385511e+39
Your chat: "Numerically, that’s about 2.3855 × 10^39"
Also curious how you think about LLM-as-calculator in relation to tool calls.
- AlexCoventry 2y agoIf you look at the precise answer, it's got 8 too many digits, despite it getting the right number of digits in the estimate you looked at. > Also curious how you think about LLM-as-calculator in relation to tool calls. I just tried this because I heard all existing models are bad at this kind of problem, and wanted to try it with the most powerful one I have access to. I think it shows that you really want an AI to be able to use computational tools in appropriate circumstances.