[Jensson]

> Or could it be that ChatGPT was never exposed to this game, but could still infer it through other game rules, such as those for Soduko?

There is no way, the game type is centuries old, you can read this giant wikipedia articles about games like this.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_square

ChatGPT "inventing" this is like thinking it invented chess.

[zuppy]

from my understanding, anybody please correct me if i'm wrong, ChatGPT can not really invent anything, it can just generate text based on probabilities obtained from the mountain of source documents used for training it. it does not think in the same way we do, it is just amazing at writing coherent phrases (and very simple code).

there's a quite long article from Stephen Wolfram about how it works and this is why I belive it can't do that: https://writings.stephenwolfram.com/2023/02/what-is-chatgpt-...

[idiotsecant]

What does it mean to say that it can't invent anything? If, for example, I ask it to make a new poem with no line previously recorded in the english language it will do so. If I google that poem to test it's originality I won't find a match. It seems to me it just made something novel, right?

[panarky]

When humans write new literature, or design new games, are we simply remixing elements of language and game mechanics that we've seen before, or is there something more going on?

[BoiledCabbage]

Who else's experiences can we pull from but our own? It can be anything else.

[BurningFrog]

You may be splitting the wrong hair here.

However it generates a text, that text may describe what for practical purposes is a new invention.

[coldtea]

>it does not think in the same way we do

And how do we think exactly? Don't we have a brain trained on input (livable experience, knowledge from books, school, videos, conversations, etc) and generating text based on probabilities (weighted sets of neurons with weights built from that set)?

[mynameisvlad]

This is not a magic square, though. All rows and columns explicitly do not add to the same number.

[Jensson]

Yes, but the non magic square is inspired by the magic square and such games are everywhere. Just buy a random puzzle book and you find pages and pages of puzzles with "make the numbers add up to these columns and rows", because they are very easy to make.

Point about magic square is that every culture invents games like that, it is one of the most basic puzzle ideas humans have, I don't see how ChatGPT can't have that in its training set.

[mynameisvlad]

For someone trying to show that a chat bot could not possibly have generated this specific game on its own because it already exists, you kind of have to show that it already exists.

All that you’ve done is shown that similar types of puzzles exist. Which, I mean, is kind of the point of a generative AI.

“Games like this” exist. Does this specific game exist?

[Jensson]

Much more advanced versions of it exists, and has existed for a long time, for example Kakuro is before computer games. Magic sum is just a special case of it. Finding a discussion with those exact rules are probably a bit hard, search engines aren't good at searching for that, but given how common these games are and how many game design discussions and ideas there are online, a game where "block out these numbers to make these sums" is surely to exist somewhere. The poster above even found the exact same game, although that wasn't described in text, but someone probably described it in text somewhere.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kakuro

[mynameisvlad]

Once again, to show that’s one thing is blatantly copying another thing, you kind of have to show that thing exists already. Kakuro is also a similar game with its own unique rules that only somewhat overlap with this one.

It’s not enough to say “a lot of games with similar rules exist” and if anything, that just shows that a generative AI is good at what it does: break down the rules of a game and make modifications to make what is potentially a new game.

If you can show an example of this exact game having existed for centuries, then you have a point. But showing that magic squares and similar games exist… just shows that magic squares and similar games exist, not that the algorithm incorrectly said this is a new game.

[Jensson]

The discussion was probability of ChatGPT having invented it, the probability that description for such a game is in ChatGPT's dataset is extremely high. We have examples of that exact game existing (the top post of this thread), and we know from my links that there are countless texts about puzzles like this out there, although they aren't exactly the same.

> It’s not enough to say “a lot of games with similar rules exist” and if anything, that just shows that a generative AI is good at what it does: break down the rules of a game and make modifications to make what is potentially a new game.

No it doesn't, even if that is the case it just shows that it adds random variations. Since we only see the trimmed subset of ideas it generates that people found good enough to post, the smart one is the person.

You would need to prove that ChatGPT actually consistently generates working puzzle ideas that are novel to convince anyone that it actually does so. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, so all I need to do is find plausible explanations to how ChatGPT found it, you would need much better evidence to convince people it actually did make a novel game.

[mhitza]

One game I can think of being very similar, is a game within a game. Dungeons & Diagrams puzzle within Last Call BBS [0]. In that game you can place or remove walls for them to add up to the numbers shown per row/column. That game has another layer of strategy built on top, as there are certain "dungeon patterns" you could observe that would in theory guide you through completion. I myself haven't noticed any patterns when I've tried the game the first time, and just relied on the numbers shown. (Guess that's why I've only played 3-4 levels)

[0] https://steamuserimages-a.akamaihd.net/ugc/18583143573725211...

[maxpro]

https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.rohitpailw...

this comment thread started with this link, this is exactly the same game

[mynameisvlad]

Sure, and then the next comment said that ChatGPT could have separately invented the game, to which the comment I replied to said that's impossible because the type of game is old and surely would have been written down and included in its corpus, which it then claimed it invented. The rest of the context matters.

ChatGPT can't deduce the rules of the game using the screenshots. They would need to be written somewhere for them to come out of its dataset. And so far, nobody has shown a game with the rules in a format that ChatGPT could consume.

Why is it so hard to believe that a generative AI generated this game from similar ones which exist? That is literally the purpose of it, after all.

[Technotroll]

Hm, well in that case I may well be wrong. Thanks for the info!

[Felminor]

Chatgpt should be able to cluster things and see were clusters could be, collect everything necessary for that theoretically cluster and the human could evaluate it.