It always acknowledged it to me. Something like: > AI: Answer that's clearly factually wrong (e.g. a function that doesn't exist or a completely wrong numerical figure). > Me: that's not right, the function doesn't exist (etc.) > AI: you are right, that function doesn't exist. The answer is blah And repeat, since if it didn't get it right first time, it seems unlikely to be able to get there at all (and you'd not kno…
I always wondered why it bothers returning the first result if it can tell it's wrong 30 seconds later if you ask it again "I think that's wrong". Why not do make the function that outputs answers also feed itself "is this actually right/are you sure/is this not wrong"? Too expensive? Giant loop?
They do this, with humans. Both during training (they use supervised and reinforcement learning), and now at a much greater scale: it's what the free public access period is for and why there's a thumbs up/down button next to the output.