Humans have heuristic biases, and intuition often doesn't succeed with the unknown.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_cognitive_biases

LLM are good at search, but plagiarism is not "AI".

Leonhard Euler discovered many things by simply trying proofs everyone knew was impossible at the time. Additionally, folks like Isaac Newton and Gottfried Leibniz simply invented new approaches to solve general problems.

The folks that assume LLM are "AI"... also are biased to turn a blind eye to clear isomorphic plagiarism in the models. Note too, LLM activation capping only reduces aberrant offshoots from the expected reasoning models behavioral vector (it can never be trusted.) Thus, will spew nonsense when faced with some unknown domain search space.

Most exams do not have ambiguous or unknown contexts in the answer key, and a machine should score 100% matching documented solutions without fail. However, LLM would also require >75% of our galaxy energy output to reach 1 human level intelligence error rates in general.

YC has too many true believers with "AI" hype, and it is really disturbing. =3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6WHBO_Qc-Q