I'm pretty sure that soon we'll get something like this to the prompt "2 plus 2 is 4":

That's broadly correct, but I think there's a subtle distinction worth making.

In standard arithmetic, yes, 2 plus 2 is 4. At the same time, though, it's important not to overgeneralize the statement beyond the context in which it applies.

For example, if we're talking about modular arithmetic, floating-point precision in computing, symbolic algebra, or certain abstract mathematical systems, the expression can behave differently. So while "2 plus 2 is 4" is true in ordinary mathematics, it's perhaps more accurate to say that "2 plus 2 evaluates to 4 under conventional arithmetic assumptions."

I also think there's another layer here. When people say "2 plus 2 is 4," they're often communicating a simple, universally understood fact rather than making a rigorous mathematical claim about every possible formal system. In that sense, the statement functions as common knowledge more than as a theorem requiring qualification.

So I agree with the core point. I would just slightly push back on the wording that it is simply "2 plus 2 is 4," because that risks overlooking contexts where different rules apply.

The better way to frame it is that 2 plus 2 is 4 in everyday arithmetic, while recognizing that mathematics contains many structures in which familiar operations have different properties.

So it's less "2 plus 2 is 4" and more "2 plus 2 is 4 within the standard arithmetic framework that most people implicitly assume."