I think it’s odd in the sense that it’s supposed to be software so it should already know what 36 plus 59 is in a picosecond, instead of doing mental arithmetics like we do
At least that’s my takeaway
Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 4 days ago
“Ask Claude to add 36 and 59 and the model will go through a series of odd steps, including first adding a selection of approximate values (add 40ish and 60ish, add 57ish and 36ish). Towards the end of its process, it comes up with the value 92ish. Meanwhile, another sequence of steps focuses on the last digits, 6 and 9, and determines that the answer must end in a 5. Putting that together with 92ish gives the correct answer of 95,” the MIT article explains."
That is precisrly how I do math. Feel a little targeted that they called this odd.
JayGray91@lemmy.zip 4 days ago
shawn1122@lemm.ee 4 days ago
This is what the ARC-AGI test by Chollet has also shows regarding current AI / LLMs. They have a tendency to approach problems with this trial and error method and can be extremely inefficient (in their current form) with anything involving abstract / deductive reasoning.
Most LLMs do terribly at the test with the most recent breakthrough being with reasoning models. But even the reasoning models struggle.
ARC-AGI is simple, but it demands a keen sense of perception and, in some sense, judgment. It consists of a series of incomplete grids that the test-taker must color in based on the rules they deduce from a few examples; one might, for instance, see a sequence of images and observe that a blue tile is always surrounded by orange tiles, then complete the next picture accordingly. It’s not so different from paint by numbers.
The test has long seemed intractable to major AI companies. GPT-4, which OpenAI boasted in 2023 had “advanced reasoning capabilities,” didn’t do much better than the zero percent earned by its predecessor. A year later, GPT-4o, which the start-up marketed as displaying “text, reasoning, and coding intelligence,” achieved only 5 percent. Gemini 1.5 and Claude 3.7, flagship models from Google and Anthropic, achieved 5 and 14 percent, respectively.
Goretantath@lemm.ee 3 days ago
Its funny because i approach life with a trial and error method too, not efficient but i get the job done in the end. Always see others who dont and give up like all the people bad at computers who ask the tech support at the company to fix the problem instead of thinking about it for two secs and wonder where life went wrong.
echodot@feddit.uk 3 days ago
But you’re doing two calculations now, an approximate one and another one on the last digits, since you’re going to do the approximate calculation you might act as well just do the accurate calculation and be done in one step.
This solution while it works has to feel of evolution. No intelligent design, which I suppose makes sense considering the AI did essentially evolve.
Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
Appreciate the advice on how my brain should work.
sapetoku@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
No intelligent design, which I suppose makes sense considering the AI did essentially evolve.
And that made a lot of people angry
Kolanaki@pawb.social 4 days ago
I use a calculator. Which an AI should also be and not need to do weird shit to do math.
Jakeroxs@sh.itjust.works 4 days ago
Function calling is a thing chatbots can do now
sapetoku@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
A regular AI should use a calculator subroutine, not try to discover basic math every time it’s asked something.
Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 4 days ago
Fascist. If someone does maths differently than your preference, it’s not “weird shit”. I’m facile with mental math despite what’s perhaps a non-standard approach, and it’s quite functional to be able to perform simple to moderate levels of mathematics mentally without relying on a calculator.
radau@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 days ago
Wtf hahahahaha
Kolanaki@pawb.social 4 days ago
I am talking about the AI. It’s already a computer. It shouldn’t need to do anything other than calculate the equations. It doesn’t have a brain, it doesn’t think like a human, so it shouldn’t need any special tools or ways to help it do math. It is a calculator, after all.
artichoke99@lemm.ee 4 days ago
OK but the llm is evidently shit at math so its “non-standard” approach should still be adjusted
Lemminary@lemmy.world 3 days ago
Wat
Imgonnatrythis@sh.itjust.works 3 days ago
Thought police mate. You don’t tell people the way they think is weird shit just because they think differently than you. Break free from that path.
OozingPositron@feddit.cl 4 days ago
Kek
Goretantath@lemm.ee 3 days ago
Yes, you shove it off onto another to do for you instead of doing it yourself and the ai doesnt.