ChatGPT spin off from: What happens to the energy in destructive interference?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Anachronist
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the reliability and capabilities of ChatGPT, particularly in providing factual information and its performance compared to human intelligence. Participants explore various examples of interactions with ChatGPT, expressing concerns about its accuracy and the nature of its responses.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Meta-discussion

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants argue that ChatGPT often fails to provide satisfactory factual answers and tends to produce incorrect or irrelevant information.
  • Others suggest that the criticisms of ChatGPT may overlook its potential for creative responses and its ability to generate text that is contextually relevant.
  • A participant points out that while ChatGPT can provide correct information, it does so inconsistently and often relies on luck.
  • There are claims that in a general knowledge contest, ChatGPT could outperform humans, but this is contested by others who argue that with access to resources like Google, humans could perform better.
  • Some participants highlight that the discussion is not about general knowledge but rather about specific technical knowledge, which they believe ChatGPT struggles with.
  • Concerns are raised about the implications of AI's capabilities in academic settings, suggesting that AI can produce work that appears credible despite potential factual inaccuracies.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express a range of views, with no consensus on the reliability of ChatGPT. Some believe it is fundamentally flawed for factual inquiries, while others defend its capabilities and suggest it can produce contextually relevant outputs.

Contextual Notes

The discussion includes various assumptions about the nature of factual accuracy, the role of time in comparisons between AI and human performance, and the implications of AI in academic contexts, which remain unresolved.

  • #61
pbuk said:
nobody is disputing that Chat GPT often produces answers that are correct.
Um ... that's precisely what they are doing. That's the only thing I've been arguing. That it doesn't "almost always give the wrong factual answer". Which was the original claim.

It's nothing to do with AI or thinking. It's a dispute about whether ChatGPT is almost always wrong.
 
Computer science news on Phys.org
  • #62
PeroK said:
Um ... that's precisely what they are doing. That's the only thing I've been arguing. That it doesn't "almost always give the wrong factual answer". Which was the original claim.
My specific claim is that it is unreliable for factual information. I don’t claim “almost always” wrong, I claim “often” wrong.
 
  • #63
The OP did claim that though.
Anachronist said:
Every time I ask ChatGPT something factual, I ask it something that I can check myself, and the answer is almost always factually incorrect.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: PeroK
  • #64
Borg said:
The OP did claim that though.
Yes. They did.
 
  • #65
Dale said:
Edit: actually the answer is still wrong, but not as wrong as before.

At least it isn't "not even wrong". :smile:
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Dale
  • #66
This thread is sounding an awful lot like arguing about "How many fairies can dance on the head of a pin."
 

Similar threads

High School What happens to the energy in destructive interference?
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Plagiarism & ChatGPT: Is Cheating with AI the New Normal?
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
10K
Graduate Destructive interference - What happens to the energy?
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
6K
Admissions Statement of purpose critique request (high-energy theory PhD)
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Graduate In what way is "dark energy" more than "none of the above"?
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • Sticky
Physics Forums Global Guidelines
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
504K
Mathematica This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 230)
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Mathematica This Week's Finds in Mathematical Physics (Week 230)
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K