How well can LLMs solve chess puzzles? (github.com)

submitted 7 months ago by httpjames@sh.itjust.works to c/technology@lemmy.world

22 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Each LLM is given the same 1000 chess puzzles to solve. See puzzles.csv. Benchmarked on Mar 25, 2024.

Model	Solved	Solved %	Illegal Moves	Illegal Moves %	Adjusted Elo
gpt-4-turbo-preview	229	22.9%	163	16.3%	1144
gpt-4	195	19.5%	183	18.3%	1047
claude-3-opus-20240229	72	7.2%	464	46.4%	521
claude-3-haiku-20240307	38	3.8%	590	59.0%	363
claude-3-sonnet-20240229	23	2.3%	663	66.3%	286
gpt-3.5-turbo	23	2.3%	683	68.3%	269
claude-instant-1.2	10	1.0%	707	66.3%	245
mistral-large-latest	4	0.4%	813	81.3%	149
mixtral-8x7b	9	0.9%	832	83.2%	136
gemini-1.5-pro-latest*	FAIL	-	-	-	-

Published by the CEO of Kagi!

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] Cyyy@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago

i mean.. try using it for even simple stuff like designing code. Often, ChatGPT creates a fantasy library that does the task you ask chatgpt tk do.. the library don't exists, but chatgpt writes you code using that fantasy software library. Same with program functions who don't exist.

Same happens with stuff like People, telephone numbers, locations, books etc.. tons of fantasy stuff.

LLMs aren't trustworthy for such stuff if you need real info and not just creative help with fantasy stuff. And even for those tasks it is usually not really good enough.

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

Thanks, I wasn't aware of that, the "fantasy" stuff was news to me when I read they make illegal moves to solve chess puzzles.
There has been a lot of praise for how amazing these LLM models are, but apparently they have some pretty serious limitations, that might even make them dangerous to use, if you are not aware.

[-] Cyyy@lemmy.world 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

The issue with LLMs is, that they got trained with all kinds of data. so not just real scientific data but also fantasy (lies, books, movie scripts etc ).. and nobody told the LLMs while training them what is fantasy or what not. so they only know how to generate text that looks "legit" without really knowing what is true and what not. so if you ask for a person and their personal details as an example.. a LLM could generate real looking data that is just fantasy because it learned that such data looks like this. same goes for everything else like programming code, book titles, facts etc.. LLMs just generates text in the correct format and which looks real, without caring if its real or not.

[-] Buffalox@lemmy.world 1 points 7 months ago

I'm sure you are right, LLM isn't intelligent enough to distinguish between fact and fantasy on it's own, which IMO is a bit disappointing considering early reports about ChatGPT. Which were overwhelmingly positive. The AI is way more artificial than intelligent. Or as I saw earlier, the i in LLM is for intelligence. 😋

this post was submitted on 25 Mar 2024

32 points (75.8% liked)

Technology

59161 readers

2217 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.

Our Rules

Follow the lemmy.world rules.
Only tech related content.
Be excellent to each another!
Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
Politics threads may be removed.
No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS