User Deleted@lemmy.dbzer0.com to Asklemmy@lemmy.mlEnglish · edit-22 years agoDeletedmessage-squaremessage-square183fedilinkarrow-up1119arrow-down13file-text
arrow-up1116arrow-down1message-squareDeletedUser Deleted@lemmy.dbzer0.com to Asklemmy@lemmy.mlEnglish · edit-22 years agomessage-square183fedilinkfile-text
minus-squarecwagner@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up2·2 years agoGPT 3.5 (what chatGPT was at the beginning) failed at non-trivial math ;) It couldn’t figure out how many characters even were in a word.
minus-squareSirGolan@lemmy.sdf.orglinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 years agoYeah. It still definitely does! The interesting thing is that it seems to be very good at estimating and the final answer it gives is usually pretty close to correct in my experience. Of course close doesn’t really count in math problems.
minus-squarecwagner@discuss.tchncs.delinkfedilinkEnglisharrow-up1·2 years agoJust tested it, at least with number of characters in a word and splitting words, GPT4 does it flawlessly.
GPT 3.5 (what chatGPT was at the beginning) failed at non-trivial math ;) It couldn’t figure out how many characters even were in a word.
Yeah. It still definitely does! The interesting thing is that it seems to be very good at estimating and the final answer it gives is usually pretty close to correct in my experience. Of course close doesn’t really count in math problems.
Just tested it, at least with number of characters in a word and splitting words, GPT4 does it flawlessly.