if you sampled N random people on the street and asked them to solve this problem, what would the outcome be? would it be better than asking chatgpt N times? I wonder
As far as mathematical thinking goes this doesn't seem an interesting metric at all. Do you believe that optimizing for this metric will indeed lead to reliable mathematical thinking?
I am of the idea that LLMs are not suited to maths, but since I'm not an expert of the field I'm always looking for counterarguments. Of course we can always wait another couple of years and the question will be resolved.
I’ve seen some truly absurd examples, like people complaining that it didn’t have the latest updates to some obscure research functional logic proof language that has maybe a hundred users globally!
GPT 4 already has markedly superior English comprehension and basic logic than most people I interact with on a daily basis. It’s only outperformed by a handful of people, all of whom are “high achievers” such as entrepreneurs, professors, or consultants.
I actively simplify my speech when talking to ordinary people to avoid overwhelming them. I don’t need to when instructing GPT.
https://chatgpt.com/share/c10c540f-b9c2-4714-ae6b-77460b900b...
Also HN: "ChatGPT just needs to spell its name."
Besides, only half of HN is all self-driving has to be 100x safer. the other half keeps bringing up the fact that Waymo is here and working, just not everywhere yet.
Doctors: https://www.news-medical.net/news/20240424/Opportunities-and....
Lawyers: https://www.ft.com/content/2365b275-8b0b-4ae9-bc4a-15c6e0776...
Or my fav: https://www.axios.com/2023/10/31/guardian-microsoft-generati...