I don’t believe this anymore. It was probably just random chance that left this impression. Initially in my experiments ChatGPT got counts correct after writing a function, but was basically always wrong when not writing function.
Sure! Here is a simple program to compute the greatest common divisor (GCD) of two numbers using the Euclidean algorithm:
def gcd(a, b): while b != 0: a, b = b, a % b return a
print(gcd(60, 48)) # should print 12
This program works by repeatedly applying the Euclidean algorithm, which states that the GCD of two numbers a and b is equal to the GCD of b and the remainder of a divided by b. The algorithm terminates when the remainder is zero, at which point the GCD is equal to the last value of b.
I hope this helps! Let me know if you have any questions.
What would be the output of this function if the inputs are −3 and −5?
If you pass negative numbers as inputs to the gcd function, the output will be the absolute value of the GCD of the absolute values of the input numbers. For example, if you call gcd(-3, −5), the function will compute the GCD of 3 and 5, which is 2, and return the absolute value of 2, which is also 2.
Here is the modified version of the gcd function that returns the absolute value of the GCD:
def gcd(a, b): a = abs(a) b = abs(b) while b != 0: a, b = b, a % b return a
print(gcd(-3, −5)) # should print 2
I hope this helps! Let me know if you have any questions.
This is very wrong. First of all, no, if you pass negative numbers as inputs to the gcd function, the output will not be the absolute value. Actually, in Python, a%b has the sign of b, therefore the first function returns −1 (you can try it). Also, the gcd of 3 and 5 or −3 and −5 is neither 2 nor −2.
So, ChatGPT doesn’t secretely run the functions, maybe it should though.
I used regenerate response because this one seemed really bad, and ChatGPT sometimes correctly gives −1 as an answer, sometimes incorrectly 1, and, oddly, often 2 or −2.
One extra run because this one is interesting, this is another use of “regenerate response”, nothing else changed
If the inputs to the gcd function are −3 and −5, the function will return −1.
Here’s why:
The function first assigns a = −3 and b = −5.
The while loop begins, and b is not equal to 0, so the loop continues.
The values of a and b are swapped, and a becomes −5 and b becomes −3.
The loop continues, and b is not equal to 0, so the loop continues.
The values of a and b are swapped again, and a becomes −3 and b becomes −2.
The loop continues, and b is not equal to 0, so the loop continues.
The values of a and b are swapped again, and a becomes −2 and b becomes −1.
The loop continues, and b is not equal to 0, so the loop continues.
The values of a and b are swapped again, and a becomes −1 and b becomes −1.
The loop continues, and b is not equal to 0, so the loop continues.
The values of a and b are swapped again, and a becomes −1 and b becomes 0.
The loop continues, and b is equal to 0, so the loop terminates.
The function returns the value of a, which is −1.
I hope this helps! Let me know if you have any questions.
This answer is interesting, because it looks very correct. I’d like to point your attention to step 9. ChatGPT claims that, at some point, both a and b will be equal to −1, which actually nevers happens. Indeed, −2%-1 = 0
As Ustice claims below
It seems to run code about as well as I do in my head.
Why do you?
Do you believe that OpenAI isn’t truthful in describing ChatGPT?
I don’t believe this anymore. It was probably just random chance that left this impression. Initially in my experiments ChatGPT got counts correct after writing a function, but was basically always wrong when not writing function.
I ran a small experiment:
This is very wrong. First of all, no, if you pass negative numbers as inputs to the gcd function, the output will not be the absolute value. Actually, in Python, a%b has the sign of b, therefore the first function returns −1 (you can try it). Also, the gcd of 3 and 5 or −3 and −5 is neither 2 nor −2.
So, ChatGPT doesn’t secretely run the functions, maybe it should though.
I used regenerate response because this one seemed really bad, and ChatGPT sometimes correctly gives −1 as an answer, sometimes incorrectly 1, and, oddly, often 2 or −2.
One extra run because this one is interesting, this is another use of “regenerate response”, nothing else changed
This answer is interesting, because it looks very correct. I’d like to point your attention to step 9. ChatGPT claims that, at some point, both a and b will be equal to −1, which actually nevers happens. Indeed, −2%-1 = 0
As Ustice claims below