I have published a LLM-assisted proof of a long-standing problem in convex geometry (70 years) while not being a specialist in convex geometry. I am a scientist and I have education and scientific experience in computer science and systems biology, but I was never a mathematician. So, well, you can definitely work across fields at least.
Do you have a link? I would also be very interested in seeing the prompts, from what I've seen you still need to understand the field, maybe I'm wrong.
Okay? Maybe that's a specific use-case where they can possibly make progress. It's also likely that most of the leg-work for that specific proof has already been done and just a bit of recombination of leading theories and publications resulted in the answer.
If you have it ask for involved legal documents to give to a lawyer like 100% of the time they find problems with it. And someone who isn't in law would have not known any better.
When you have it write complex code that is not easy/quick to test, especially things that are specifically NOT concretely defined, like net-code (because it's all on the trade-offs you want to accept for your particular game), it's going to just repeatedly create sync issues.
I've asked it to write-up a detailed explanation of the different types of turns in 4-panel dance games and it's just permanently wrong no matter what I say.
The more unique and lacking of training data that exactly represents the problem statement the more impossible the statistical machine will generate text that makes sense.
atemerev · · focus · HN ↗
Madmallard · · focus · HN ↗
Everyone not in a particular field asking LLM about said field is rolling bad dice.
atemerev · · focus · HN ↗
tripledry · · focus · HN ↗
Madmallard · · focus · HN ↗
If you have it ask for involved legal documents to give to a lawyer like 100% of the time they find problems with it. And someone who isn't in law would have not known any better.
When you have it write complex code that is not easy/quick to test, especially things that are specifically NOT concretely defined, like net-code (because it's all on the trade-offs you want to accept for your particular game), it's going to just repeatedly create sync issues.
I've asked it to write-up a detailed explanation of the different types of turns in 4-panel dance games and it's just permanently wrong no matter what I say.
The more unique and lacking of training data that exactly represents the problem statement the more impossible the statistical machine will generate text that makes sense.