• BatmanAoD@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      Thanks for sharing this! I really think that when people see LLM failures and say that such failures demonstrate how fundamentally different LLMs are from human cognition, they tend to overlook how humans actually do exhibit remarkably similar failures modes. Obviously dementia isn’t really analogous to generating text while lacking the ability to “see” a rendering based on that text. But it’s still pretty interesting that whatever feedback loops did get corrupted in these patients led to such a variety of failure modes.

      As an example of what I’m talking about, I appreciated and generally agreed with this recent Octomind post, but I disagree with the list of problems that “wouldn’t trip up a human dev”; these are all things I’ve seen real humans do, or could imagine a human doing.

      • huppakee@piefed.social
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 days ago

        such a variety of failure modes

        What i find interesting is that in both cases there is a certain consistency in the mistakes too - basically every dementia patient still understands the clock is something with a circle and numbers and not a square with letters for example. LLMs can tell you cokplete bullshit, but still understands it has to be done with perfect grammar in a consistant language. So much so it struggles to respond outside of this box - ask it to insert spelling errors to look human for example.

        the ability to “see”

        This might be the true problem in both cases, both the patient and the model can not comprehend the bigger picture (a circle is divided into 12 segments, because that is how we deconstructed the time it takes for the earth to spin around it’s axis). Things that seem logical to use, are logical because of these kind of connections with other things we know and comprehend.

    • ZC3rr0r@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      Thanks for sharing that mindfuck. I honestly would’ve thought something was wrong with my cognition if you hadn’t mentioned it was a test beforehand.

    • snooggums@piefed.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      7 days ago

      qwen 2.5 is absolutely pants on head ridiculous compared to gpt5 when I’m looking at it right now.

  • sheepishly@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    Given that the AI models are basically constructing these “blindly”- using the language model to string together html and javascript without really being able to check how it looks- some of these are actually pretty impressive. But also making the AI do things it’s bad at is funny. Reminds me of all the AI ASCII art fails…

    • zerofk@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      7 days ago

      So far, I’d give qwen the prize for most artistic impression of a clock.

      Kimi K2 appears to consistently get it right.

      • zerofk@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        7 days ago

        And just as I typed that, Kimi made one where 9 and 10, and 11 and 12 overlapped.

  • Bazell@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    7 days ago

    Well, KIMI K2 seems to have created the working one. Others failed. I suppose that this model was optimized for this while others not.

    • SolarBoy@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 days ago

      The clocks change every minute. I’ve seen some from deepseek and qwen that looked ok. But kimi seems to be the most consistent

  • rekabis@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    6 days ago

    Another reason why, while AI might be a fun toy, no one who is serious about getting work done will touch it with a dirty barge pole. The gratuitous hallucinations alone ought to be a sufficient deterrent.

  • psud@aussie.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    I got a couple of good ones:

    A correct AI generated clock

    Another correct AI clock

    When I first opened it, deepseek also had a correct clock, but I accidentally refreshed the page when I scrolled up to double check its time, second time through only these two were right

    Ed. Names are below the clock, the top one was by the clock drawing champion Kimi K2

  • kersplomp@piefed.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    6 days ago

    Really cool idea, but the site seems a bit biased for the chinese models, or is otherwise set up weird. I’m not able to reproduce how consistently bad the others are in web dev arena, which generally accepted as the gold standard for testing AI web dev ability.

    • AppleTea@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 days ago

      Each model is allowed 2000 tokens to generate its clock. Here is its prompt: Create HTML/CSS of an analog clock showing ${time}. Include numbers (or numerals) if you wish, and have a CSS animated second hand. Make it responsive and use a white background. Return ONLY the HTML/CSS code with no markdown formatting.

      are you using the same prompt?

      • kersplomp@piefed.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 days ago

        There’s a couple differences. It’s giving it the current time as part of the prompt, which is interesting. The other difference is that it’s asking it to make it responsive. But even when I use that exact prompt (inserting the time obv), it works fine on claude, openai, and gemini.

        So there’s definitely an issue specific to this page somewhere. Maybe it’s not iframing them? I’m on mobile so I can’t check.