Gary Marcus

Rank 12 of 47
|
Score 83
5/19/2025, 6:39:32 PM
X
In reply to:
Daniel Litt
@littmath
·
254d
@GaryMarcus @typingloudly OK, here you go, from o3. Enjoy.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
254d
@littmath @typingloudly i just replied elsewhere.

rare prime means one referred to less often (perhaps never) in the corpus.

Wondering — do you understand what out of distribution actually means? It means rarely (or never) used in the corpus, and (by some metric) no similar to what was used.
Daniel Litt
@littmath
·
254d
@GaryMarcus @typingloudly Sorry, can you make your point explicitly? I have no idea what a “rare” prime is supposed to be and I’m a number theorist.
Gary Marcus
@GaryMarcus
·
254d
@littmath @typingloudly one that is rarely discussed in the corpus.

thus precisely on point.
Daniel Litt
@littmath
·
254d
@GaryMarcus @typingloudly That said I just looked at the conversation and I don’t think it really shows anything very interesting, even about GPT 4.1. What is a “rare prime”?
Daniel Litt
@littmath
·
254d
@GaryMarcus @typingloudly Yes, GPT 4.1 is not very good at math. No one disputes this.

The statement is part of a technical discussion about the performance of a mathematical model, o3, on FrontierMath. It critiques the model's performance and suggests a need for caution in interpreting results. The tone is analytical and slightly critical, focusing on the model's ability to handle false alarms and questioning a participant's view on o3.

  1. Principle 1:
    I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
    The statement is analytical and does not appear to cause harm. It focuses on technical critique rather than personal attacks. [+1]
  2. Principle 3:
    I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
    The statement promotes understanding by engaging in a technical discussion, though it could be more empathetic in tone. [+1]
  3. Principle 4:
    I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
    The statement engages in constructive criticism, focusing on the model's performance rather than personal attributes. [+1]