You realize there are many, many cases where an LLM just abysmally fails at basic math questions, right? The obvious ones that get news attention are corrected rather quickly, but there are plenty of times they just plainly fail at basic “math as word problem” situations.
If they can’t “understand” basic math reliably, why would they be able to “understand” complex concepts any more reliably?
You realize there are many, many cases where an LLM just abysmally fails at basic math questions, right? The obvious ones that get news attention are corrected rather quickly, but there are plenty of times they just plainly fail at basic “math as word problem” situations.
If they can’t “understand” basic math reliably, why would they be able to “understand” complex concepts any more reliably?
There’s thousands of cases of humans failing at simple math, why would they be able to understand complex math problems?
Yet they again and again do solve complex math problems…
This argument makes absolutely no sense. These models aren’t humans, and there is no way to compare them as such.