[R] OFF TOPIC: chatGPT glibly produces a lot of wrong answers?

[CALUM POLWART]

It does often behave better if you say to it "that doesn't seem to be
working" and perhaps some error message

It is afterall a language tool. Its function is to provide text that seems
real.

If you ask it a science question and ask it to provide references in
Vancouver format, it can format the references perfectly. They will be from
real authors (often who have published in the general field), they will be
in real journals for the field. But the title is entirely false but
plausible.

Expect many a scammer to get caught out...

On Sun, 13 Aug 2023, 18:50 Bert Gunter, <bgunter.4567 using gmail.com> wrote:

> **OFF TOPIC** but perhaps of interest to some on this list. I apologize in
> advance to those who may be offended.
>
> The byline:
> ********************************
> "ChatGPT's odds of getting code questions correct are worse than a coin
> flip
>
> But its suggestions are so annoyingly plausible"
> *************************************
> from here:
> https://www.theregister.com/2023/08/07/chatgpt_stack_overflow_ai/
>
> Hmm... Perhaps not surprising. Sounds like some expert consultants I've
> met. 😕
>
> Just for amusement. I am ignorant about this and have no strongly held
> views,
>
> Cheers to all,
> Bert
>
>         [[alternative HTML version deleted]]
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-help using r-project.org mailing list -- To UNSUBSCRIBE and more, see
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
> PLEASE do read the posting guide
> http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
> and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.
>

	[[alternative HTML version deleted]]