Probably should’ve just asked Wolfram Alpha

  • elbucho@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 hour ago

    This is very clearly an example of bad AI, but maybe it was trying (and failing) to convey this?

    Basically, 1/3 + 1/9 + 1/27 + 1/81 + … + 1/3^n = 1/2.

    Probably not. But maybe.

  • deadbeef79000@lemmy.nz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    3 hours ago

    “42”

    “The answer to life the universe and everything is 42!?”

    “Yes, I checked it quite thoroughly.”

    “But what was the actual question?”


    Alternatively, garbage in, garbage out.

    • Pyro@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      ·
      4 hours ago

      What, your printer doesn’t have a full keyboard under its battery? You’ve gotta get with the times my man.

  • orcaA
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 hours ago

    Maybe the intent is to make people even dumber. It’s just misinformation all the way down.

  • Deebster@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    Google’s AI seems dumber than the rest, for example here’s Kagi answering the same (using Claude):


    edit: typoed question originally

    Perhaps Google’s tried to make it run too cheaply - Kagi’s one doesn’t run unless you ask for it, and as a paid product it’ll have different priorities.

    • jbrains@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      edit-2
      4 hours ago

      There are two meanings being conflated here.

      “1/3 more” can mean “+ 1/3” or "* (1 + 1/3)“.

      So “1/3 more than 1/3” could be 2/3 or 4/9, but not 1/2.

      Instead 1/2 is 1/2 more than 1/3, not 1/3 more. That’s the meme I’ve seen go around recently.

      • Deebster@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        4 hours ago

        Yes, and the Google AI response is correct (and quite clear) in what it says. edit: Thanks Batman. I mean that Google’s understanding of the question is logical (although still the maths is wrong as you say (now I’ve re-read you)) and its answer explained the angle it was answering from.

        However, I think the reasonable assumption for the intention behind the question is relative to a whole. I had third of a pizza, and now I have an extra sixth of a pizza. It’s subtle, but that’s the kind of thing AI falls down on.

        • jbrains@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          4 hours ago

          I agree with your assessment regarding the intention of the phrase. We’re back at the silly arithmetic meme that hinges on not grouping terms explicitly and watching people yell at each other in the mistaken belief that there’s one authoritative interpretation of an ambiguous string of symbols.

          Still, the actual mistake remains. Why an extra 1/6 of the pizza? 1/3 of 1/3 is 1/9, not 1/6. That’s 1/2 of 1/3.

          • Deebster@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            3 hours ago

            I thought we were finally agreeing fully! My understanding of the question is “what is the difference between a third (of a pizza, say) and a half?”

            1/2 - 1/3 = 1/6
            1/2 = 1/3 + 1/6
            a half is one sixth more than a third.

            btw, I fixed my Kagi screenshot since I’d missed a word from the question (reading comprehension’s clearly not my strong point today)

        • BatmanAoD@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          You are saying “yes” to a comment explaining why the Google AI response cannot possibly be correct, so what do you mean “and [it’s] correct”?

          • Deebster@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            4 hours ago

            Ah, you’re right - I misunderstood jbrain’s point to just be about the “relative to the original” understanding. Guess I’m no smarter than Google’s AI.

      • xigoi@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 hour ago

        It tries to auto-determine when to trigger, but you can explicitly trigger it by putting a question mark after your query.

    • Zagorath@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      4 hours ago

      “a half is one-third more than a third” should mean either

      1/3 + 1/3 = 1/2

      Or

      1/3 + (1/3 × 1/3) = 1/2

      Neither of which is true.

  • jbrains@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    3 hours ago

    Oh. I just noticed the extraneous word in the search, which might be throwing off the LLM trying to understand it.

    • jbrains@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      I asked ChatGPT these questions and got sensible answers.

      How much more is one half than one third?

      [subtraction answer: 1/6 more]

      That’s one possibility, but what about the other way to interpret that question?

      [ratio answer, but expressed as “1.5 times as much” rather than “1/2 more”]