They are bad at math. But they are good at writing code and as an optimization some providers have it secretly write code to answer the problem, run it and give you the answer without telling you what it did in the middle part.
2) If you have something to say, just say it. Don't put words in my mouth and then argue with a thing I didn't say.
Can you please present a reasonable maths problem that I can bounce off GPT so we can see it fail? I can give you many hundreds of relatively complex problems, none of which have appeared in a textbook, that GPT has not only solved, but critiqued my own crappy solutions for. I'm only asking you for one counterpoint.
I am referring to specific, documented behavior of LLMs. Google it.
I don't need to reconstruct my argument axiomatically from folk beliefs.
A way to test might be running an open model locally, directly (without a harness) where you could be sure it's not going through a translation layer. I think these days it might have this tool call behavior built in, but I think back in the day it was treated more like a magic trick. Without it, it behaved similar to "how many r's are in strawberry" for simple math.
The request is for some reasonable math problem a model like GPT or Claude will fail at. I'm not going to set up a local model or some harness for it; I'm just going to copy/paste it into ChatGPT and watch it solve it.
Propose a problem, if you think I'm wrong about this. Seems simple.
Source? Did you search anything like I suggested or no?
Your argument: "it is possible to Google for people claiming LLMs can't do math".