[seqfan] Re: Sequence from ChatGPT

[M. F. Hasler]

On Sun, Apr 2, 2023 at 4:04 PM <israel at math.ubc.ca> wrote:

> As for looking up something, ChatGPT appears to know about
> SuperSeeker.
> Response: ******************* To check if the Online Encyclopedia of
> Integer Sequences (OEIS) contains a sequence containing both 3633 and
> 3598745, we can use the "superseeker" feature on the OEIS website.
>


> Using the superseeker, we can search for sequences that contain both 3633
> and 3598745 in their list of terms.

...
> As we can see, there is only one sequence in the OEIS that contains both
> 3633 and 3598745 in its list of terms, and that sequence is A262132.
> ****************************
> Which sounds great until you check that A262132 is not that at all, and
> does
> not contain either 3633 or 3598745.
>

Which shows that "ChatGPT knows" means that it just reproduces what it has
"read"
without understanding anything, or even being able to "use" this
"knowledge" otherwise than by making new phrases from it.
(Although it might be within reach of the technology to make an
auto-curated knowledge base (with semantics) of what can be found on
internet (attaching probabilities or "confidence levels" on the
"data"(relations) depending among others on the source and an possible
"proofs" from other, related "data")
-- which is not what ChatGPT does, however).

- Maximilian


> On Apr 2 2023, Alonso Del Arte wrote:
>
> >Proofreading might be a more productive use of ChatGPT here, e.g., "how
> >would you explain that numbers with property *P* also have property *Q*?"
> >Such a prompt might generate more useful content than asking it to come up
> >with an entire new entry from scratch.
> >
> >By the way, has anyone tried looking up something on the OEIS using a
> >mobile device rather than a desktop computer, e.g., a Samsung Galaxy S8+?
> >If you don't know how to fix that problem, ChatGPT might be able to help
> >you.
> >
> >Al
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >On Sun, Apr 2, 2023 at 12:37PM Arthur O'Dwyer <arthur.j.odwyer at gmail.com>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> On Sun, Apr 2, 2023 at 10:43AM <israel at math.ubc.ca> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Out of curiosity, I asked ChatGPT:
> >> >
> >> > Write a new sequence for the Online Encyclopedia of Integer Sequences
> >> >
> >> > The result was
> >> >
> >> [nonsense]
> >>
> >> Please don't submit machine-generated spam to OEIS. As I understand it,
> >> OEIS is supposed to be a mathematical resource. If it ends up full of
> >> machine-generated spam, it becomes useless.
> >> See also
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> https://meta.stackoverflow.com/questions/421831/temporary-policy-chatgpt-is-banned
> >> https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33891538
> >>
> >>
> >> The sequence of concatenations of Fibonacci
> >> > numbers and squares in both orders (not allowing leading 0's) is
> >> >
> >> > 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 18, 19, 20, 21, 24, 29, 30, 31, 34, 39, 40,
> >> > 41, 42, 43, 45, 48, 50, 51, 54, 59, 80, 81, 84, 89, 90, 91, 92, 93,
> >> > 95, 98, 113, 116, 121, 125, 130, 131, 134, 136, 139, 149, 155, 160,
> >> > 161, 162, 163,
> >> 164,
> >> > 165, 168, 181, 189, 210, 211, 214, 216, 219, 225, 236, 249, 250, 251,
> >> 252,
> >> > 253, 255, 258, ...
> >> >
> >> > which doesn't seem to be in OEIS, and I think I'll contribute it.
> >>
> >>
> >> Why? Is there anything noteworthy about this sequence?
> >> "Computer <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_says_no>said
> >> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_says_no> submit it" is not
> >> noteworthy. Computer says lots of things.
> >>
> >> I think it's particularly un-mathematically-interesting because
> >> "concatenation" is nothing but an artifact of base-10 notation. If you
> >> think there's something special about concatenating Xs and Ys in base
> 10,
> >> why not also in base 8, or base 3, or base 37?  And why squares but not
> >> cubes, Fibonacci numbers but not strings of 1s,...
> >>
> >> -Arthur
> >>
> >> --
> >> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
> >>
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Seqfan Mailing list - http://list.seqfan.eu/
>