|
|
|
|
|
by solomonb
11 days ago
|
|
I gave chatgpt 3.5 the type signature for a co-algebraic encoding of a mealy machine: newtype Mealy s i o = Mealy { runMealy :: (s, i) -> (s, o) }
And it gave a really impressive analysis.Then I scrambled all the names and asked with a fresh context like: newtype Foo z e g = Bar { blob :: (z, e) -> (z, g) }
It got completely confused and generated a bunch of non-sense. It was at that moment I realized that LLMs don't really understand anything.And yes I understand that a newer model would not get confused by this. |
|
I don't think this test shows that an LLM doesn't "understand". It shows more that it has similar failure modes as humans.