181–190 of 261 posts
T/F question 1d says: >Google's recent quantum supremacy experiment demonstrated the successful use of quantum error-correction. How "recent" is the experiment in question? Would it have been publicized before GPT-4's training cutoff?
The exam is from 2019 and GPT-4's training cutoff is 2021, so it should know about the experiment.
This just means this exam can be solved by searching internet and compiling the collections in a presentable format. For human this is not a easy task because first they need to memorized these information, second, they somehow need to not resort to intensive matrix multiplication in order to say something meaningful. Even the results from human and chatgpt might look similar but they are very different. This is some…
Sure, it's not exactly amazing that a computer can add numbers but it does show that it is doing more than pattern matching.
When I was growing up in the 2000s, it was required to learn a foreign language in school. I took Spanish but dropped the class after a year, thinking that when I grew up, computers would be able to translate text far better humans could. Would you believe it, transformers were invented ten years later. I wonder if it's worth learning anything anymore.
I truly pity you for thinking that learning a foreign language is a redundant exercise because of machine translation. And besides, though machines may perform well on menus and tax returns, I hardly think them on the cusp of emitting fine translations of great poems or novels.
It was a disappointing lesson in how reductive people can be.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>no machine translation system currently in existence could translate the 逆転裁判 games to Ace Attorney games Maybe it's already in the training set, but GPT-4 does give that exact translation. I've found that GPT-4 is exceptionally good at translating idioms and other big picture translation issues. Where it occasionally makes mistakes is with small grammatical and word order issues that previous tools do tend to get r…
Can you try this[0]? I have no access to the -4... Have you actually used GPT-4 for translation? Seriously all this talk about only getting explicit meaning across would be easily dispelled in an afternoon if you only bothered to try. Bing Chat: GPT-4を翻訳に使用したことがありますか？本当に明示的な意味しか伝えられないという話は、試してみれば午後には簡単に反証できます。 (Have you utilized GPT-4 for translations? The story that only really explicit meaning can be conveyed, can…
実際にGPT-4を翻訳に使ったことがありますか？本当に、明示的な意味だけを伝えるという話が、試してみるだけで簡単に解決できるなんて、冗談じゃないですか。
> To the best of my knowledge—and I double-checked—this exam has never before been posted on the public Internet, and could not have appeared in GPT-4’s training data. Sure, but you can Google the answers to most of the questions. Personally I've accepted that GPT does learn and apply concepts present in its training data, and all of this would be. Learning is part of intelligence but not the whole thing. (I thought…
> you can Google the answers to most of the questions 1) Students can Google the answers also, but neither students nor GPT-4 are allowed to Google the answers during the test , so it remains a fair comparison. 2) Many of the questions require calculations, which are far less Googleable.
2) Months ago, in my earliest interactions with ChatGPT, I asked it to solve math problems. It gave me back stuff with LaTeX formatting. Obviously it had, if not these exact problems, similar templates in its training set.
Recently it was shown that GPT is completely incapable of solving Codeforces problems that appeared after it was trained.
Whatever is going on here is interesting but less impressive than it looks.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was curious so I asked GPT-4 to translate a bit of french literature, here it is, along with the official translation (I'll let you guess which is which) ------- The tale I'm about to unfold commenced with a mysterious handwriting on an envelope. Within the pen strokes that outlined my name and the address of the Fossil Review, a publication I was associated with and where the letter had been forwarded from, there…
The second is profoundly better. The first is unpublishable.
Still though, if you wanted GPT to spit out something like the first or second, you'd only need to ask. "add a literary flair" works (for the first).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The point is that it may miss a tumor obvious to a human doctor.
As long as on average it performs better that should not be an issue.
It's impressive on the surface... But give me Google and I too can pass some extremely challenging tests that I actually know nothing about. If someone told you I passed the "bar" exam, you would be impressed. If they then said, he had google and lots of time. You wouldn't be that impressed anymore. The impressive thing here is that AI can read and answer questions... it's not overly impressive that it can use inform…
This is obviously very cool, but at this point — who knows what I’ll say in a year — my concern with these LLMs is that they’re in the uncanny valley. Here’s one passing a very difficult test. Amazing! Now, rely on it to build a nuclear doohickey for a power station or a multi-billion dollar device for CERN or anything really and, well, no. So humans still have to check the output, and now we’re in that situation whe…
how often is the “have to check output” more work than just doing the task at hand without the LLM in the first place?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's safe to assume the enrollment of Prof. Aaronson's Quantum Computing course isn't 50k.
Thank you Captain Obvious. The parent comment was about classes at UT in general, not about one specific class.