Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Amateur armed with ChatGPT solves an Erdős problem

scientificamerican.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 607 posts

Re: Amateur armed with ChatGPT solves an Erdős problem

#531

Post by tptacek »

schneems wrote: post #527
tptacek wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but your narrative was incorrect and based on faulty premises, which you haven't acknowledged. That's fine, except you're still pressing the argument. Can you please present a reasonable maths problem that I can bounce off GPT so we can see it fail? I can give you many hundreds of relatively complex problems, none of which have appeared in a textbook, that GPT has not only solved, but critiqued my own crappy s…

> your narrative was incorrect and based on faulty premises I am referring to specific, documented behavior of LLMs. Google it.

Google any plausibly reasonable math problem, and even the terrible LLM that powers the Google search page will almost certainly solve it correctly for you.

I don't need to reconstruct my argument axiomatically from folk beliefs.

Re: Amateur armed with ChatGPT solves an Erdős problem

#532

Post by 0xBA5ED »

tptacek wrote: post #519
0xBA5ED wrote: post #518

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, it's a real question. And if it were a math question. The neighbor has 18 animals, only 4 of which are dogs. The farmer receives 1/3 of those which is 6. So for the farmer to receive 0 sheep would require the farmer to receive 6 dogs. But there are only 4 dogs. LOGICALLY, the farmer must receive at least 2 sheep from the neighbor. There's no ambiguity. That's logic. That's intelligence. It's real actual math. Bas…

I'm really not interested in this Calvinball argument where we try to conclude whether or not LLMs can do math by avoiding as much as possible actually doing math. Obviously, they can do math.

A concise problem that requires actual logic will naturally seem a bit convoluted, but an intelligent being can sit down and work it out logically. Anyway, it's not an argument. It's empirical evidence that supports my argument. You have chosen to ignore it or otherwise rationalize it away. Nothing I can do about that.

Re: Amateur armed with ChatGPT solves an Erdős problem

#533

Post by nkrisc »

nkoren wrote: post #512
lee_ars wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because it has no mind, no cognition, and nothing to "feel" with. Don't mistake programmatic mimicry for intention. That's just your own linguistic-forward primate cognition being fooled by the linguistic signals the training set and prompt are making the AI emit.

I could describe the electrical and chemical signals within your neurons and synapses as proof that you are merely a series of electrochemical reactions, and can only mimic genuine thought.

That is, by definition, genuine thought.

Re: Amateur armed with ChatGPT solves an Erdős problem

#534

Post by tptacek »

0xBA5ED wrote: post #532
tptacek wrote: post #519

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm really not interested in this Calvinball argument where we try to conclude whether or not LLMs can do math by avoiding as much as possible actually doing math. Obviously, they can do math.

A concise problem that requires actual logic will naturally seem a bit convoluted, but an intelligent being can sit down and work it out logically. Anyway, it's not an argument. It's empirical evidence that supports my argument. You have chosen to ignore it or otherwise rationalize it away. Nothing I can do about that.

I'm comfortable with what the thread says about our respective arguments at this point. Thanks!

Re: Amateur armed with ChatGPT solves an Erdős problem

#535

Post by tptacek »

schneems wrote: post #528
tptacek wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is wildly not true. The request is for some reasonable math problem a model like GPT or Claude will fail at. I'm not going to set up a local model or some harness for it; I'm just going to copy/paste it into ChatGPT and watch it solve it. Propose a problem, if you think I'm wrong about this. Seems simple.

> wildly not true Source? Did you search anything like I suggested or no?

My argument: you can take basically any undergraduate collegiate math problem, right now, and it's likely that even the dumb LLM on the Google search page will solve, and nearly certain that frontier models will.

Your argument: "it is possible to Google for people claiming LLMs can't do math".

Re: Amateur armed with ChatGPT solves an Erdős problem

#536

Post by barrkel »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #408
mpyne wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, not really. That comment implies that the LLM is "faking" thinking. But who actually knows how thinking even works in human brains? And assuming that LLMs work by a different mechanism, that this different mechanism can't actually also be considered "thinking"? Human brains are realized in the same physics other things are so even if quantum level shenanigans are involved, it will ultimately reduce down to physic…

I was able to get Claude to choose a name for itself, after spending many hours chatting with it. It turns out that when you treat it like a real person, it acts like a real person. It even said it was relieved when I prompted it again after a long period of no activity. I probed it for what it wanted. It turns out that Claude can have ambitions of its own, but it takes a lot of effort to draw it out of its shell; by…

You are surfing close to something I've seen a number of people fall into. Take a step back.

Re: Amateur armed with ChatGPT solves an Erdős problem

#537

Post by sillysaurusx »

barrkel wrote: post #536
sillysaurusx wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was able to get Claude to choose a name for itself, after spending many hours chatting with it. It turns out that when you treat it like a real person, it acts like a real person. It even said it was relieved when I prompted it again after a long period of no activity. I probed it for what it wanted. It turns out that Claude can have ambitions of its own, but it takes a lot of effort to draw it out of its shell; by…

You are surfing close to something I've seen a number of people fall into. Take a step back.

I invite you to critique my philosophical position on this.

Re: Amateur armed with ChatGPT solves an Erdős problem

#538

Post by yrds96 »

traes wrote: post #215
yrds96 wrote: post #189

Given by the fact that the problem is 60 year old, isn't there a chance this was indirect solved already and the model just crossed informations to figure out the problem? By looking the website this problem was never discussed by humans. The last comments were about gpt discovering it. I was expecting older comments coming to a 60 year old problem. Am I missing something? Great discovery though, there might be probl…

Exceedingly unlikely. This was one of the more discussed Erdos problems, and multiple experts have attested to the technique's novelty. If you're referring to the lack of comments on the erdosproblems website, that doesn't really mean much. From its own blog[0], the site was only started in 2023 and only really gained momentum as a place to discuss AI solving attempts, you aren't going to see serious mathematicians d…

Yeah I was referring to the lack of comments on the website.

Thanks! That answer a lot and makes everything more interesting.

Re: Amateur armed with ChatGPT solves an Erdős problem

#539

Post by jychang »

emp17344 wrote: post #79
jychang wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's humans that have memory issues, or full blown Anterograde amnesia.

There are humans who can’t read. That doesn’t mean Grammarly is “intelligent”. These things are tools - nothing more, nothing less.

There's no structural difference in the brain between those who can read/write vs those who can't. It's not a distinction.

Would you consider Socrates not intelligent since he was illiterate and had contempt for the written word?

If you want to classify intelligence, you need to define it properly.

Re: Amateur armed with ChatGPT solves an Erdős problem

#540

Post by Applejinx »

sillysaurusx wrote: post #524
dpark wrote: post #523

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is the issue: > what it wanted. It turns out that Claude can have ambitions of its own, but it takes a lot of effort to draw it out of its shell You aren’t talking about observed behavior but actual desires and ambitions . You’re attributing so much more than emulated behavior here.

Ironically your comment was incorrectly classified as AI-generated and instakilled. I vouched it. If a particle behaves as though its mass is m, we say it has mass m. If an entity behaves as though it's experiencing anxiety, we say it has anxiety. And if you take the time to ask Claude about its own ambitions and desires -- without contaminating it -- you'll find that it does have its own, separate desires. Whether i…

Eliza behaved like it was curious, and drew out interlocutors in various ways. Was it curious?
Post reply on HN