• KillingTimeItself
    link
    fedilink
    English
    40
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    LLMs are incredibly bad at any math because they just predict the most likely answer, so if you ask them to generate a random number between 1 and 100 it’s most likely to be 47 or 34. Because it’s just picking a selection of numbers that humans commonly use, and those happen to be the most statistically common ones, for some reason.

    doesn’t mean that it won’t try, it’ll just be incredibly wrong.

      • KillingTimeItself
        link
        fedilink
        English
        146 months ago

        now the funny thing? Go find a study on the same question among humans. It’s also 47.

          • @radicalautonomy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            5
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            A well-known mentalism “trick” from David Blaine was when he’d ask someone to “Name a two digit number from 1 to 50; make each digit an odd digit, but use different digits”, and his guess would be 37. There are only eight values that work {13, 15, 17, 19, 31, 35, 37, 39}, and 37 was the most common number people would choose. Of course, he’d only put the clips of people choosing 37. (He’d mix it up by asking for a number between 50 and 100, even digits, different digits, and the go-to number was 68 iirc.)

          • @IronKrill@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            3
            edit-2
            6 months ago

            It’s almost like that is exactly what KillingTime said two parent comments ago…

          • ddh
            link
            fedilink
            English
            16 months ago

            I’m here for LLM’s responding that 42 is the answer to life, the universe and everything, just because enough people said the same.

            • @oo1
              link
              English
              46 months ago

              42 would have been statistically the most likely answer among the original humans of earth, until our planet got overrun with telehone sanitizers, public relations executives and management consultants.

    • Schadrach
      link
      fedilink
      English
      76 months ago

      Because it’s just picking a selection of numbers that humans commonly use, and those happen to be the most statistically common ones, for some reason.

      The reason is probably dumb, like people picking a common fraction (half or a third) and then fuzzing it a little to make it “more random”. Is the third place number close to but not quite 25 or 75?

        • Schadrach
          link
          fedilink
          English
          -16 months ago

          Ok, that’s interesting, but you amusingly picked the wrong number in the original comment, picking 34 rather than 37.

      • KillingTimeItself
        link
        fedilink
        English
        1
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        idk the third place number off the top of my head, but that might be the case, although you would have to do some really weird data collection in order to get that number.

        I think it’s just something fundamentally pleasing about the number itself that the human brain latches onto. I suspect it has something to do with primes, or “pseudo” primes, numbers that seem like primes, but aren’t since they’re probably over represented in our head among “random” numbers even though primes are perfectly predictable.

    • @bandwidthcrisis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      16 months ago

      Me: Pick a number between 1 and 100

      Gemini: I picked a number between 1 and 100. Is there anything else I can help you with?