they predict the numbers likelihood of a token appearing next >oh heres a bunch of text where letter 4 came after 2 plus 2 so its given higher value than all other letters
>>105945151 >the people who understand the limits of LLMs donโt. the people who understand the limits of LLMs know what tokenization is and how it affects math performance, kruger
Anonymous
7/18/2025, 10:48:54 AM No.105945185
>>105945163 The meltdown of a porn addict who is already feeling less and less each time he uses ai.
>>105945151 What about the people that are too retarded to understand the image in the OP and realize llms can do arithmetic better than a human now? This has nothing to do with math btw, it's true that they suck at math.
>>105945230 Most humans can't even do 7x4 6048337 x 6258 Maybe some mathematicians or tricksters in the 1800s but not even those people care nowadays. A system that has a bunch of little useful programs accessible via natural language to everyone is the death of the midwit LARPer.
>>105945232 Ahaha sorry I sometimes forget this board is flooded with subhuman jeets who canโt do 5x5. I can see why some of you might think the AI is very lifelike, but to actual human beings the times tables are no big deal.
>>105945569 >If you actually wrote it out like twenty three plus seventy might have more luck It still doesn't 'know' how to do math and it has tokens for numbers, you don't need to spell them out for them. If anything that might reduce accuracy because there's probably way less data where math is done using written numbers instead of the symbols.
>>105945105 (OP) who cares they write all the boilerplate code for me
Anonymous
7/18/2025, 12:50:10 PM No.105945856
>>105945133 >>105945151 >>105945330 >>105945457 That's what they are doing right now with <tool_call>. They are training them to use existing tools such as calculators so they don't have to store that information inside the model., freeing up a ton of space for other stuff.
>>105945105 (OP) >>105945118 this is the dumbest possible use of a neural network, you're literally running a complex multi-dimensional math algorithm to simulate a retard and then asking it to do math how about make it in pieces and have one piece determine that a maths problem is happening and parse that to fucking python and return the result it's not that hard
>>105947755 Or you could just use your brain, like a non-retard.
Anonymous
7/18/2025, 8:08:42 PM No.105948911
>>105945105 (OP) This is such an easy problem to fix. Just have the LLM recognize a math calculation question and then have it delegate that bit to a calculator service. Why in the holy fuck hasn't this been done yet? LLMs can Google search shit and even Google has a calculator service automatically answer basic calculation queries
>>105949518 The cope is the same. >Why don't model weights build the correct algorithm and loop it. Ignoring the fact that human brains don't work like this.
I think LLMs have lost the plot if we are sincerely asking this question.
Anonymous
7/18/2025, 9:30:23 PM No.105949611
>>105949545 It does try to follow the algorithm, but the problem is it can't. It's not seeing the manual multiplication, it's just seeing something like "106,041,768\n+ 795,313,260\n+ 2,651,044,200\n+39,765,663,000". How many numbers can you multiply if you're only allowed to think with text?
>>105949611 I does not try to follow any algorithm you are familiar with. The text it produces may appear to if you prompt it to, but the actual functioning doesn't. An LLM doesn't think with text it takes text as input to a neural network. The text prediction algorithm it follows when asked to multiply is likely very complicated and specific to each input. Hence why it doesn't work in general and the discrepancy between close boxes in the plot
>>105949518 >Look now my calculator is only wrong 40% of the time instead of 90% Still a shit calculator that no reasonable person should be using. Now think of all the other ways it can be wrong that are far harder to catch then double checking with a calculator. Failed tool
>>105950373 >how do you explain chain of "thought" models being so much smarter? Non-CoT models often outperform CoT models in "simple tasks".
This is why Zed and Claude Code default to Sonnet 4 instead of Sonnet 4 Thinking. Less token usage prevents context from exploding, and you can selectively enable CoT for complex sub-tasks within a prompt.
Anonymous
7/18/2025, 11:34:34 PM No.105950844
>>105945244 There is actually a system to add, subtract and multiply large numbers in your head. I read a book on it when I was younger and learned the addition but never finished the book. All the nerds at these maths things use the same system.
Anonymous
7/18/2025, 11:42:46 PM No.105950928
>>105945235 why are burgers so obsessed with cuckshit?
>>105950928 It's a coping mechanism to the environment men find themselves in.
Modern dating is basically cuckoldry. You will make vows of lifelong love and fidelity at the altar to a woman that has opened her legs to several men before you. She has sucked penises of, gotten anally defiled by, swallowed semen from, and even likely rimmed assholes of, other men that put much less effort into fucking her than you did into marrying her. All that so that she will later think of these men fondly while you try to please her.
>>105945283 I know this is bait, but the OP shows how long the numbers are. The element in the fifth row ans fifth column correspond to something like 12345ร98760, not 5ร5
>>105951461 As someone else explained, that chart is showing it fails this every single time: 1234567890x100
Computing is the thing COMPUTERS are supposed to be best at, so itโs noteworthy that LLMs fail so badly. And itโs no wonder if you know the absolute basics about LLMs and how they work. But AI coomerbros want to have it both ways.
>>105952548 It gets it right: -96.2% of the times in row 10 column 3 -84.6% of the times in row 3 column 10
So yeah not always above 90%, fair enough, I only read the first value. My statement is still closer to the truth than "it fails this every single time", however. If I had to guess, I would also assume that multiplying by 100 has a way higher success rate than an arbitrary 3 digit number.
Anonymous
7/19/2025, 4:31:53 AM No.105952885
>>105951427 Sounds like you're just really into cuck shit