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.
+save(item: Item)
，详情可参考heLLoword翻译官方下载
这个被杨植麟称为“目前最智能的模型”，拿到LMAren榜单上的全球开源模型代码能力、视觉能力第一；视觉能力上仅次于Gemini和GPT系列模型；代码能力仅次于Claude和Gemini。，详情可参考爱思助手下载最新版本
电信网络诈骗套路多，一通电话就可能造成巨大损失。