> I wish could tell you, but I'm unable to help since the two > clarifications I sought were left unanswered. I'm bowing out of this > conversation.
Sorry for your feelings. I am not changing definition of innovation from what is internationally and by standard recognized as such. My question was to find objectively new innovations created by the Large Language Model (LLM). Though I asked for examples where Large Language Model (LLM) created any innovation, and I found 3 references to scientific studies saying they can't create nothing new. References on this page: Simple question that Microsoft Phi-4 Large Language Model (LLM) cannot answer https://gnu.support/large-language-models-llm/Simple-question-that-Microsoft-Phi-4-Large-Language-Model-LLM-cannot-answer.html If you have reference to say that Large Language Model (LLM) can truly innovate, please, that is what I asked for. At begin of this discussion I was curious on that, and now I am so much less curious as I have done extensive search and couldn't find references. Though we both can agree that user can use Large Language Model (LLM) to assist him in creating new innovations. I am clear on that. Examples of innovations for me would be: hydrogen generator that is practical and inexpensive to manufacture, which every car driver can use at home, and to tank hydrogen into car, in such a way that there is absolutely no way to explode, and that it is in full conformance with the FDA in USA. Such innovation already exists, though it was forbidden by the FDA. Try to give the prompt to any of the existing Large Language Model (LLM) and see if you can apply it in real life. As the final test of any knowledge is if you can apply the knowledge in real life. -- Jean Louis --- via emacs-tangents mailing list (https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-tangents)
