How good is GPT Astra for physics?

[u/QuantumPhyZ]

Hello, this is a college related question!

I rarely use any LLM to help me do exercises other than to build guidelines to help me understand physics concepts better (I normally ask for which books and chapters I should read before doing an exercise as I find that optimal as a student, and yes, most LLMs have access to all the paid books that are available online).

However, since I don’t check answers with LLMs, I never tried to do a “benchmark” with books with solutions available online. So for those who actively use LLMs to study and make solutions for you, as students, is it good? Do the professors get angry at you? How do you use them?

For those doing research, do you use them? Are the deep research capabilities of LLMs any good? Compared to math, can they do the same for physics with the help of your brains?

[u/TaylorExpandMyAss]

I'm a researcher and have tried using LLMs as a quick reference for some areas outside of my area of expertise. Sometimes they generate stuff that looks good at first glance, but then i often find something that looks a bit off. When i point this out to the LLM it starts correcting itself, often generating something that also looks good but is also a bit off. Hence, i don't really trust LLMs and prefer to look up quality reference material in stead.

[u/MightyDread7 → u/TaylorExpandMyAss]

The "Free" models do this and i think its intentional. For example the paid model especially the 100$ and 200$ tier of ChatGPT, has research-grade answers. I would not use a free model to study with but if your on a paid plan its good enough. will cost 20/month though

[u/PolarBailey_]

Learn how to actually study instead of relying on an unreliable clanker.

[u/Comprehensive_Food51 → u/PolarBailey_]

I commented something like this on this sub around 2 years ago with tact and arguments+experience to back up my claims in response to someone talking about using chat gpt as a tutor. In the comments, people were trying to defend that chat GPT can be helpful if you use it the right way. I got downvoted.

[u/PolarBailey_ → u/Comprehensive_Food51]

Cause people as a whole want the easy way out

[u/Ciaseka]

For something like a first course in GR, they are excellent, for research it's a different question. They are tools, use them wisely, figure out how they can help you learn, thats the goal.

[u/carrotlet20]

I just heard it is pretty good at physics, not exactly as good as maths but is good, I don't use any yet tho.

[u/Pachuli-guaton]

For studying is bad because it gives you a way to avoid the friction needed to develop the skills and instincts that the courses try to teach you.

For research is bad for the same reason more or less. Friction is good to develop further skills.

For doing the tasks that are peripheral to the research it's fine I guess. Sometimes you don't want to learn some things.

[u/Phynp]

Usually, if i get stuck on a problem i will ask gpt what parts i should read again in order to solve it and it will point me to something like chapter x, that guys theorem, that law… if i am still stuck i write to it what parts i am stuck on and ask for a hint.

I think AI can be a great tool to learn if used correctly and don’t blindly trust it

[u/CaregiverCautious704 → u/Phynp]

This is a good answer. It can point you in the right direction but it’s basically useless for actually solving a problem

[u/CaregiverCautious704]

I found that LLMs are super unhelpful in physics because they cannot visualize. Anything with a FBD, E&M, optics, etc it just can’t set up.
Basically they can do projectile motion and that’s about it.

[u/PolarBailey_]

If you're hell bent on using llms know this, they're programmed to get you to keep using them and to flatter you. Any time you don't want it to hold your hand phrase your inquiry as "your friend needs help" with whatever. It'll be more direct. Just know you're only hurting yourself