Note that my tests were via groq and the r1 70B distilled llama variant (the 2nd smartest version afaik)
Edit 1:
Incidentally... I propositioned a coworker to answer the same question. This is the summarized conversation I had:
Me: "Hey Billy, can you answer a question? in under 3 seconds answer my following question"
Billy: "sure"
Me: "How many As are in abracadabra 3.2.1"
Billy: "4" (answered in less than 3 seconds)
Me: "nope"
I'm gonna poll the office and see how many people get it right with the same opportunity the ai had.
Edit 2:
The second coworker said "6" in about 5 seconds
Edit 3:
Third coworker said 4, in 3 seconds
Edit 4:
I asked two more people and one of them got it right... But I'm 60% sure she heard me asking the previous employee, but if she didnt we're at 1/5
In probably done with this game for the day.
I'm pretty flabbergasted with the results of my very unscientific experiment, but now I can say (with a mountain of anecdotal juice) that with letter counting, R1 70b is wildly faster and more accurate than humans .
It didn't, I just wanted a short reply. Though it failed when I asked again in the same chat. But when asked to split the word to 2 parts it became sure that the correct answer is 3.
Here is the fun part
Certainly! Let's split "strawberry" into two equal parts and count the 'r's in each:
First half: "strawb"
Letters: S, T, R, A, W, B
'r's: 1 (at position 3)
Second half: "erry"
Letters: E, R, R, Y
'r's: 2 (at positions 2 and 3)
No. It literally cannot count the number of R letters in strawberry. It says 2, there are 3. ChatGPT had this problem, but it seems it is fixed. However if you say “are you sure?” It says 2 again.
Ask ChatGPT to make an image of a cat without a tail. Impossible. Odd, I know, but one of those weird AI issues
It searches the internet for cats without tails and then generates an image from a summary of what it finds, which contains more cats with tails than without.
It doesn't search the internet for cats, it is pre-trained on a large set of labelled images and learns how to predict images from labels. The fact that there are lots of cats (most of which have tails) and not many examples of things "with no tail" is pretty much why it doesn't work, though.
It's not the "where" specifically I'm correcting, it's the "when." The model is trained, then the query is run against the trained model. The query doesn't involve any kind of internet search.
And I care about "how" it works and "what" data it uses because I don't have to walk on eggshells to preserve the sanctity of an autocomplete software
You need to curb your pathetic ego and really think hard about how feeding the open internet to an ML program with a LLM slapped onto it is actually any more useful than the sum of its parts.
Regardless of training data, it isn't matching to anything it's found and squigglying shit up or whatever was implied. Diffusion models are trained to iteratively convert noise into an image based on text and the current iteration's features. This is why they take multiple runs and also they do that thing where the image generation sort of transforms over multiple steps from a decreasingly undifferentiated soup of shape and color. My point was that they aren't doing some search across the web, either externally or via internal storage of scraped training data, to "match" your prompt to something. They are iterating from a start of static noise through multiple passes to a "finished" image, where each pass's transformation of the image components is a complex and dynamic probabilistic function built from, but not directly mapping to in any way we'd consider it, the training data.
Ah, you seem to be engaging in bad faith. Oh, well, hopefully those reading at least now between understanding what these models are doing and can engage in more informed and coherent discussion on the subject. Good luck or whatever to you!
so.... with all the supposed reasoning stuff they can do, and supposed "extrapolation of knowledge" they cannot figure out that a tail is part of a cat, and which part it is.