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.
https://feedx.site
，推荐阅读safew官方下载获取更多信息
/home → /var/home
Раскрыты подробности о договорных матчах в российском футболе18:01，这一点在同城约会中也有详细论述
买锂矿、收金矿，左手新能源、右手贵金属，这盘横跨两大资源赛道的大棋，布局者正是常年隐匿于公众视野之外的神秘闽商——姚雄杰。
在使用中的航空器上使用可能影响导航系统正常功能的器具、工具，不听劝阻的，处五日以下拘留或者一千元以下罚款。，推荐阅读谷歌浏览器【最新下载地址】获取更多信息