I wanted to test this claim with SAT problems. Why SAT? Because solving SAT problems require applying very few rules consistently. The principle stays the same even if you have millions of variables or just a couple. So if you know how to reason properly any SAT instances is solvable given enough time. Also, it's easy to generate completely random SAT problems that make it less likely for LLM to solve the problem based on pure pattern recognition. Therefore, I think it is a good problem type to test whether LLMs can generalize basic rules beyond their training data.
這次習近平公開談論此事極為罕見。
。heLLoword翻译官方下载对此有专业解读
4VercelNear-MonopolyDeployment
Что думаешь? Оцени!
广东联盟集采将生长激素纳入目录，金赛药业的核心产品水针剂若中标，降价幅度可能高达 70%。