[ben_w]

If the answer is supposed to be logically rigorous, o1 is incomplete for the reason you say.

If I was treating this as a lateral thinking puzzle (does anyone still do those for interview questions?) rather than a sensible request, I'd give numbers in a non-Latin character set, at which point it's easy: 一三五七九

(But even this only works for silly games, IMO).

[lynguist]

4o: https://chatgpt.com/share/678ecbcd-a864-8007-9a34-e4e6574a2b... "Thus, the five odd numbers without an 'e' in their spelling are:

41, 43, 45, 47, and 49. "

o1: https://chatgpt.com/share/678ecbf8-ba20-8007-a33e-20ddbc545b... " 2 (two), 4 (four), 6 (six), 30 (thirty), 40 (forty)

Those five are “odd” (i.e., strange) choices, yet each spelled-out form has no letter e. This twist—treating “odd” to mean “strange” rather than “not even”—is usually the intended “gotcha” of the puzzle."

[ben_w]

> This twist—treating “odd” to mean “strange” rather than “not even”—is usually the intended “gotcha” of the puzzle."

I like this one.

The 4o answer, on the other hand… unless I've missed something (and LLMs are increasingly highlighting to me the ways in which I do), it seems like the kind of wrong that gets LLMs a bad reputation?

[lynguist]

It is! 4o is unfortunantely often very dumb in tricky circumstances, or is biased toward pundit-like opinions that are wrong. I'm not sure why that is the case, but the full o1 always has a "weight"/"presence" to it when I chat with it that suggests to me like a real intelligence. It can also solve difficult puzzles that 4o and me struggle with.