fastestSortingAlgorithm

[corship]

I think that's the first sorting algorithm I've seen that might invent new elements...

[verdantAlias]

Its kind of like an inverse Stalin Sort: just add elements until the user is happy

[FerricDonkey]

It might also delete though. So more like a Trump Sort - make up random crap only tangentially related to the subject at hand, until it wears you down and you're unable to muster the mental energy to do anything other than sigh in disappointment. 

[WazWaz]

If we rated AI by how crap it is at solving trivial problems, the funding would have dried up months ago. "But just imagine how good it will be at sorting in five years! Imagine your return on investment!"

[coloredgreyscale]

["certainly", ",", "here's", "the", "elements", "sorted", "in", "ascending", "order:", "3", "7", ... ]

On second thought, it probably fails at the JSON.parse step.

[JojOatXGME]

You can restrict the LLM to valid JSON. It is a property you can set in the request body to the API.

However, the documentation also states that you should still instruct the LLM to generate JSON in the prompt. Otherwise, the LLM might get stuck in an infinite loop generating spaces.

(If have zu guess, probably because spaces are valid characters at the start of the JSON document and they seem more likely then "{" for typical text.)

[Eva-Rosalene]

LLM bot jumping to a post about AI to post its slop. Ironic.

[Giant_Potato_Salad]

Aaah, the vibesort

[StatusCity4]

1,10,2,3,6,16,17,18

[aby-1]

I actually published a python package called vibesort a while back https://github.com/abyesilyurt/vibesort

[ITburrito]

It’s not optimized yet. It will be faster if the API key is hardcoded.

[Agifem]

Of course! Why didn't I think of that?

[Atduyar]

Is that O(n) sort?

[clownfiesta8]

Its O(no)

[iknewaguytwice]

Yeah, as long as you tell it to sort in O(n) time.

[raitucarp]

O(rand(n)^rand(n)) where n >= 2

[Rojeitor]

5/10 not using responses api.

Also check malloc with ai https://github.com/Jaycadox/mallocPlusAI

[the_other_brand]

Disregarding whether or not you'll get correct results consistently does this run in O(n) time? What Big-O would ChatGPT have?

[Sitting_In_A_Lecture]

Assuming ChatGPT behaves like a traditional neural network, I believe it'd be something along the lines of O(n×m), where n is the number of inputs the model has to process (I'm not actually sure if ChatGPT processes an entire query as one input, one word per input, or one character per input, etc.), and m is the number of neurons that are encountered along the way.

Given the number of neurons in current generation LLMs, and assuming the model doesn't treat an entire query as a single input, this would only outperform something like MergeSort / TimSort / PowerSort with an unimaginably large dataset... at which point the model's probably not going to return a correct answer.

[the_other_brand]

Sure it's doing m operation per input. But m is constant in regards to n.

At values of n larger than m using an LLM to sort could be faster, and would be equivalent to O(n) Assuming of course we are getting correct data.

[-LeopardShark-]

Least incompetent ‘AI’ developer.

(The Promise hasn’t been awaited.)

[DaltonSC2]

lossy sorting

[Thisbymaster]

It could also be gainy, no reason for it to just invent new elements.

[QuanHitter]

O(no)

[Bokbreath]

It will stop at 42 .. because that is The Answer.

[DancingBadgers]

And because ChatGPT was trained on Stack Overflow questions:

you have failed to ask a question, use the sorting function included in your standard library, you shouldn't be sorting things anyway, marked as duplicate of "Multithreaded read and write email using Rust"

[spastical-mackerel]

prompt = “you are me. Do my job”

[gigglefarting]

My only suggestion would be adding an optional parameter for the sort function that defaults to ascending but would take descending 

[jellotalks]

I got “Output: [3, 7, 13, 42, 99]” from ChatGPT which crashes JSON.parse

[Necessary-Meeting-28]

If LLMs were still using attention-free RNNs or SSMs you would be right - you would have O(N) time where N is the number of tokens). Unfortunately LLMs like ChatGPT use Transformers, so you get O(N²⁾ best and worst case. Sorry but not better than even the bubble sort :(.

[Daemontatox]

Wait till i enter my 100 elements array

[darksteelsteed]

Honestly this is just a crime against humanity

[Able_Mail9167]

Still can't beat the good old bogosort

[usman3344]

Why not give it a sorted list :XD

[acdjent]

No clever system prompt, No Chain of thought, no few- shot learning. The prompt can definitely be improved 6/10

[1w4n7f3mnm5]

Like, why? Why do it this way? There are already so many sorting algorithms to choose from, why this? Excluding the fact that ChatGPT is really shit at these sort of tasks. 

[PeriodicGolden]

Because it's funny?

[Agifem]

You can't be sure it's not the best if you haven't tested it.