So you’re saying if I pointed an LLM, say GPT 5.6 Sol, at a PDF copy of a textbook and asked it questions about something i’m stuck on and don’t understand, it wouldn’t be able to teach me anything?
replylearning is not a passive activity. likewise an llm can be used in a passive or active fashion.
Only if you already could read the pdf yourself. Otherwise you're learning without structure. Think CS undergrad vs script-kiddie
replyThat is a ridiculous take. It was trained on human notes. It very much has an opinion on how to structure specific content for teaching.
replyOkay, please ask an LLM to produce a 200 page intro book to Abstract Algebra. Even Astra high can barely write 30 pages coherently.
replyHumans have LOOONG contexts
Why is having your LLM one-shot a 200 page textbook a prerequisite to learning? That doesn't follow. If you use an LLM more like a tutor and less like a book, you can get an enormous amount of value for 1/50 the cost. Monthly GPT plus membership is half the cost of a bay area hourly tutor rate, and infinitely patient and available 24/7
replyOkay I was a professor for a bit. Few things I found
reply- LLMs cannot motivate a person to learn because they aren't people
- Learning requires rewiring your brain; you need to try and read content without explanations of every question you might have. Struggling is required for learning
- LLMs cannot generate structured content on long scales. I have tried this many times. Your average TA can easily write a calculus textbook.
- LLMs are RLHFd to just agree with you. Learning requires disagreement and tutoring requires assuredness
> Okay, please ask an LLM to produce a 200 page intro book to Abstract Algebra.
replyIf you're giving it prompts like that, you've shot yourself in the foot.