I find that if you create a context that allows for you to be wrong:
> I am unfamilliar with foo, but my current belief is bar, although I must admit that baz is possible. I'm seeing evidence qux. Is my belief of bar about foo correct? Please explain in terms of qux.
...they will in fact contradict your position.
I weasled my way past many prerequisties and am taking a science class that's way above my level. Being uncertain/humble with chatGPT has lead me to many lightbulb moments which were in contradiction to my initial beliefs, and have filled in my lack of prerequisites nicely.
So you're not wrong, but it's a problem that's easy to avoid if you're careful about how you set up the context.
This isn't a contradiction to the improv model. It fits it perfectly. And being in a position not to be able to judge the output you receive by your own admission makes me question why you're so impressed with the output.
I'm impressed because when I verify it against the textbook it ends up being correct.
I'd love to have time to just read the whole textbook, but ChatGPT uses words that appear in the index, so I end up reading only the parts I don't already know (twice, once as phrased by ChatGPT, a second time while verifying it).
It feels like a better way to learn because you're not in passive-absorb-info mode for long periods. Instead you're in a much more active mode of alternating between asking questions, being critical of new info, and then confirm/denying it. Certainly not better than 1:1 instruction, but better than a lecture where there's only time to ask/answer two or three of your questions.
> I am unfamilliar with foo, but my current belief is bar, although I must admit that baz is possible. I'm seeing evidence qux. Is my belief of bar about foo correct? Please explain in terms of qux.
...they will in fact contradict your position.
I weasled my way past many prerequisties and am taking a science class that's way above my level. Being uncertain/humble with chatGPT has lead me to many lightbulb moments which were in contradiction to my initial beliefs, and have filled in my lack of prerequisites nicely.
So you're not wrong, but it's a problem that's easy to avoid if you're careful about how you set up the context.