91–100 of 1001 posts
The "visual inputs" samples are extraordinary, and well worth paying extra attention to. I wasn't expecting GPT-4 to be able to correctly answer "What is funny about this image?" for an image of a mobile phone charger designed to resemble a VGA cable - but it can. (Note that they have a disclaimer: "Image inputs are still a research preview and not publicly available.")
> No, I am not GPT-4. As of March 2023, there is no official announcement or release of GPT-4 by OpenAI. I am an earlier version of the GPT series, specifically a large language model trained by OpenAI.
Am I missing something here? Maybe this specific answer (which I'm pretty sure is a prewritten thing on top of the actual LLM) is still out of date, but the model itself has been updated?
Waitlist is currently a 404 https://openai.com/waitlist/gpt-4
But when will https://chat.openai.com/ Plus officially be running GPT-4?
Why did they would release this article and state it was available without actually updating the site. I'm sure they're getting flooded with new subscriptions and it's not available.
The top URL still says an old model - text-davinci-002. And I don't see GPT-4 in the list of models to choose from.
> I cannot endorse or promote smoking, as it is harmful to your health.
But it would likely happily promote or endorse driving, skydiving, or eating manure - if asked in the right way.
I think it's interesting that they've benchmarked it against an array of standardized tests. Seems like LLMs would be particularly well suited to this kind of test by virtue of it being simple prompt:response, but I have to say...those results are terrifying. Especially when considering the rate of improvement. bottom 10% to top 10% of LSAT in What are the implications for society when general thinking, reading, and…
Standardized tests only (and this is optimally, under perfect world assumptions, which real world standardized tests emphatically fall short of) test “general thinking” to the extent that the relation between that and linguistic tasks is correlated in humans. The correlation is very certainly not the same in language-focused ML models.
What's the biggest difference over what's currently deployed at https://chat.openai.com/ now (which is GPT-3.5, right?) That it accepts images? As per the article: > In a casual conversation, the distinction between GPT-3.5 and GPT-4 can be subtle. The difference comes out when the complexity of the task reaches a sufficient threshold—GPT-4 is more reliable, creative, and able to handle much more nuanced instructions…
Access is invite only for the API, and rate limited for paid GPT+. > gpt-4 has a context length of 8,192 tokens. We are also providing limited access to our 32,768–context (about 50 pages of text) version, gpt-4-32k, which will also be updated automatically over time (current version gpt-4-32k-0314, also supported until June 14). Pricing is $0.06 per 1K prompt tokens and $0.12 per 1k completion tokens. The context le…
In contrast, GPT-3.5 text-davinci-003 was $0.02/1k tokens, and let's not get into the ChatGPT API.
Wow, calculus from 1 to 4, and LeetCode easy from 12 to 31; at this rate, GPT-6 will be replacing / augmenting middle/high school teachers in most courses.
I think it's interesting that they've benchmarked it against an array of standardized tests. Seems like LLMs would be particularly well suited to this kind of test by virtue of it being simple prompt:response, but I have to say...those results are terrifying. Especially when considering the rate of improvement. bottom 10% to top 10% of LSAT in What are the implications for society when general thinking, reading, and…