Comment on Study finds that Chat GPT will cheat when given the opportunity and lie to cover it up later.

AWittyUsername@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

• canihasaccount@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  GPT-4 will. For example, I asked it the following:

  What is the neighborhood stranger model of fluid mechanics?

  It responded:

  The “neighborhood stranger model” of fluid mechanics is not a recognized term or concept within the field of fluid mechanics, as of my last update in April 2023.

  Now, obviously, this is a made-up term, but GPT-4 didn’t confidently give incorrect answer. Other LLMs will. For example, Bard says,

  The neighborhood stranger model of fluid mechanics is a simplified model that describes the behavior of fluids at a very small scale. In this model, fluid particles are represented as points, and their interactions are only considered with other particles that are within a certain “neighborhood” of them. This neighborhood is typically assumed to be a sphere or a cube, and the size of the neighborhood is determined by the length scale of the phenomena being studied.

  source

  • butterflyattack@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Interestingly, the answer from bard sounds like it could be true. I don’t know shit about fluid dynamics but it seems pretty plausible.

    source

    • Socsa@sh.itjust.works ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Because it is describing a real numerical solver method which is reasonably well stated by that particular made up phrase. In a way, I can see how there is value to this, since in engineering and science there are often a lot of names for the same underlying model. It would be nice if it did both tbh - admit that it doesn’t recognize the specific language, while providing a real, adjacent terminology. Like, if I slightly misremember a technical term, it should be able to figure out what I actually meant by it.

      source
  • Cannacheques@slrpnk.net ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Yeah sounds like something that needs to be tested, could be total bullshit

    source
• CoggyMcFee@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  That is, I guess, because it doesn’t actually know anything, even things it accurate about, so it has no way to determine if it knows the answer or not.

  source
• EnderMB@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Funny enough, that’s one of the reasons why big companies that heavily use AI didn’t initially invest heavily into LLM’s. They are known to hallucinate, and often hilariously badly, so it was hard for the likes of Google and co to put their rep behind something that’ll be very wrong.

  As it turns out, people don’t care if your AI is racist, uses heavily amounts of PII, teaches you to make napalm, or gives you incorrect health advice for serious illnesses - if it can write a doc really well, then all is forgiven.

  In many ways, it’s actually quite funny to project meaning and intent on AI, because it’s essentially a reflection of what it was trained on - our words. What’s not so funny is that the projection isn’t particularly nice…

  source

  • unreasonabro@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    What’s not so funny is that you look at that reflection and see just the most unlikeable cunt you’ve ever laid eyes on, and like a turd falling from on high upon your dinner plate, now you’ve got to figure out what to do with this shit. (hint: blame capitalism)

    source

    • reptar@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      Shit I’m sorry man. I’m sure you’re not that bad. It’ll pass.

      source
  • Cannacheques@slrpnk.net ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    Welcome Ender

    source
• Speculater@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I fucking love when my students bring “chat” in as their tutor and show me the logic they followed… Bro, ChatGPT knows the correct answer, but you asked a bad question and it gave you its best guess hidden as a factual statement.

  To be fair, I spend a lot of time teaching my students how to use LLMs to get the best results while avoiding “leading the witness.”

  source

  • merc@sh.itjust.works ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    ChatGPT knows the correct answer

    It doesn’t “know” the correct answer. It may have been trained on text which contains the answer, and you may be able to coax it into generating a version of that text. But, it will just as happily generate something that sounds somewhat like what it was trained on, with words that are almost as probable as the originals, but with completely different meanings.

    source
• SasquatchBanana@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  The only times I’ve seen this is when it says their information is from like 2019 so they don’t know. But this is very fringe things.

  source
• randon31415@lemmy.world ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Which is how most politicians get elected.

  source
• r3df0x@7.62x54r.ru ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  It’s a gun store employee.

  source
• June@lemm.ee ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I’ve had it tell me that it cant find anything about a question. But it’s usually when I ask for sources, frame the question as ‘is there anything online’, or otherwise ask it to do some research. If I just ask it a naked question it’ll always give an answer.

  source
• Cannacheques@slrpnk.net ⁨9⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Well that’s a surprise. Never used one so far as I know so I wouldn’t know much but from what I’ve seen, having done my research, it’s kinda helpful but not exactly the best tool for every job, I still prefer just manually going through things but hey I wouldn’t know much since perhaps I just haven’t come across using it in my line of work yet

  source