This needs citation. These are not the same things. It will get numerical references right if it has sources used in the model, but it isn't doing any numerical calculations.
Just look at any papers that put models through mathematical benchmarks. The model isn't memorizing these problems. For example I just generated 2 random 64 bit integers and asked ChatGPT to add them.
"6769545085823578960 + 16027170449476717488"
ChatGPT said the answer is 22796715535300296448. It got the correct answer even though the problem wasn't in its training data.
Yep, as always, people (and LLMs) take stuff for granted because they read it somewhere months ago. That’s why we are doomed; everyone believes anything without question if it’s not against their personal agenda.
This need citation :) It does numerical calculations, at least in GPT-4 mode, tested. It can do simple arithmetic, and even has sort of 'imagination', or impression of it. I asked it to imagine a room with 4 colored balls at the corners. Then asked about the view angles between some pairs of balls as if looking from the center of the room, and from other balls. It gave the answers with explanations.
This doesn't mean it's always correct, or can be trusted without verification.
I can feed ChatGPT code that does calculations (and have) and have it calculate the right answers. It also gets it wrong a lot, so it's not good at that, but any notion that it can't do numerical calculations is easy to disprove.
"6769545085823578960 + 16027170449476717488"
ChatGPT said the answer is 22796715535300296448. It got the correct answer even though the problem wasn't in its training data.