zlacker

[return to "Elon Musk sues Sam Altman, Greg Brockman, and OpenAI [pdf]"]
1. 1vuio0+vn2[view] [source] 2024-03-02 01:59:41
>>modele+(OP)
"In March 2023, OpenAI released its most powerful language model yet, GPT-4. GPT-4 is not just capable of reasoning. It is better at reasoning than average humans. It scored in the 90th percentile on the Uniform Bar Exam for lawyers. It scored in the 99th percentile on the GRE Verbal Assessment. It even scored a 77% on the Advanced Sommelier examination."

One could argue a common characteristic of the above exams is that they each test memory, and, as such, one could argue that GPT-4's above-average performance is not necessarily evidence of "reasoning". That is, GPT-4 has no "understanding" but it has formidable reading speed and retention (memory).

While preparation for the above exams depends heavily on memorisation, other exams may focus more on reasoning and understanding.

Surely GPT-4 would fail some exams. But when it comes to GPT-4's exam performance, only the positive results are reported.

https://freeman.vc/notes/reasoning-vs-memorization-in-llms

◧◩
2. romwel+Bo2[view] [source] 2024-03-02 02:11:22
>>1vuio0+vn2
>Surely GPT-4 would fail some exams

Some? It does hilariously badly on basic math.

With confidence, though.

◧◩◪
3. MacsHe+Nt2[view] [source] 2024-03-02 03:19:38
>>romwel+Bo2
GPT-4 with code interpreter is better at math than elite Math undergrads.
◧◩◪◨
4. romwel+005[view] [source] 2024-03-03 07:31:40
>>MacsHe+Nt2
>GPT-4 with code interpreter is better at math than elite Math undergrads.

Yeah, and I just spent $20 to call BS on what you said.

GPT-4 just bullshits with confidence. I don't see how code interpeter can possibly help here.

Behold:

======================

Me: I drew three arrows on a piece of paper starting at the same point, pointing left, up, and diagonally (up and right). Do they represent linearly independent vectors?

---------------------

ChatGPT: In this case, you have described three different arrows pointing in unique directions:

One pointing left, which can be represented as a vector, say, [-1,0] in a two-dimensional space (using standard Cartesian coordinates).

One pointing up, which can be represented as a vector, say, [0, 1].

One pointing diagonally up and to the right, which could be represented as a vector, say, [1,1].

For these vectors to be linearly independent, no vector can be expressed as a linear combination of the others. In other words, there's no way to add or subtract scaled versions of any two vectors to get the third.

Looking at the vectors you've described:

The first vector represents movement purely in the horizontal direction. The second vector represents movement purely in the vertical direction. The third vector represents movement in both directions simultaneously.

Because none of these vectors can be created by scaling and adding the other two (for example, you can't add or subtract any combination of the first and second vectors to get the third one), they are linearly independent.

In mathematical terms, if we form a matrix with these vectors as columns, the determinant of this matrix would not be zero (a non-zero determinant indicates linear independence for the columns of the matrix). This is a more formal way to show their independence, but based on their directions and the explanation above, these vectors are indeed linearly independent.

[go to top]