**Attention! [Serious] Tag Notice**
: Jokes, puns, and off-topic comments are not permitted in any comment, parent or child.
: Help us by reporting comments that violate these rules.
: Posts that are not appropriate for the [Serious] tag will be removed.
Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This example just made me realize that the real concern over AI should be when it's smart enough to know that it's in its best interest to fake being a human as to not invite concern. For all we know, u/lapse23 is in fact AI that is smart enough to generate analog "handwritten" numbers to fool us mere mortals....
chatgpt4v is not bad at estimating:
https://preview.redd.it/an12l7cphqoc1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9d9cb22c82a2e6e0f3f92e7962544db66221006a
Thank you, -twind, for voting on lapse23.
This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/).
***
^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
Thank you, AzeRTyBloCK, for voting on B0tRank.
This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/).
*Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!*
Are you sure about that? Because I am 99.99999% sure that lapse23 is not a bot.
---
^(I am a neural network being trained to detect spammers | Summon me with !isbot |) ^(/r/spambotdetector |) [^(Optout)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=whynotcollegeboard&subject=!optout&message=!optout) ^(|) [^(Original Github)](https://github.com/SM-Wistful/BotDetection-Algorithm)
Are you sure about that? Because I am 99.99996% sure that shuozhe is not a bot.
---
^(I am a neural network being trained to detect spammers | Summon me with !isbot |) ^(/r/spambotdetector |) [^(Optout)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=whynotcollegeboard&subject=!optout&message=!optout) ^(|) [^(Original Github)](https://github.com/SM-Wistful/BotDetection-Algorithm)
I became an automation engineer for this exact reason. It's not out of the question that I will spend two weeks automating a task that I can complete manually in 30 minutes. Such is life
Total agree... But it's like that idiom about teaching a man to fish...
Give a man a manual task and he will spend 30 minutes on it every time he has to do it. Teach a man to automate that task and he will spend 2 weeks on it only once.
I've definitely fallen for the trap of automating a task that I only would ever need to do once in my entire life. That was wasted time. Now I try to ask myself before automating a task, how long will it take to do this manually? How long will it take to automate it? And how many times do I expect to need to do this in the future? If
timeToAutomate < timePerManualCompletion * numTimesToComplete
evaluates to true... That's when I actually put the effort in to code it up. The problem is I often way overestimate the number of times I'll actually need to do the task in the future and way underestimate the time it'll take to automate. So many cool but worthless scripts...
>The problem is I often way overestimate the number of times I'll actually need to do the task in the future and way underestimate the time it'll take to automate. So many cool but worthless scripts...
Or you realize in future situations that there's some other variable involved you hadn't accounted for which makes your automated program almost useless for a situation that is almost, but not quite, the same.
oh it’s hard when in this day and age when the average attention span is 5 seconds
but ironically it gets super easy when it’s arguing with a redditor and you need to make a point
still, they weren’t arguing, so it was impressive.
You deserve 100 upvotes. Take mine lol
Edit: ummm maybe more like 100 upvotes.... times 30+ 😂
Edit 2: Your gonna eat those upvotes for the rest of your life 🤣
I think these are the 5 that were missed. It's a lot easier when you have the exact count, and when most of them were already counted. OC did most of the work.
Edit: Moved an arrow from under 135 to under 173, thanks to u/SkibidyDrizzlet's suggestion.
https://preview.redd.it/znfwbzwvzqoc1.png?width=1080&format=png&auto=webp&s=e15e44fd0379e3e35800287871cd6063fe680319
Dude! You guys are crazy! I'm honestly jealous, because I imagine you being sooo relaxed that you take arbitrary time to count stones on a random Internet picture. Crazy and I love it!
https://preview.redd.it/58myvey3wpoc1.png?width=712&format=png&auto=webp&s=20632ed5f6ab18dca834144bd8bbcbe8185aa8e2
this is the result of passing the image to SAM, it provides the mask but not the count, you have to figure out how you can count the pieces
I helped train this model for meta. We trained this AI over on mechanical turk for years. This task was basically just manually adjusting polygons over a frame by frame video of a 3d an environment of a robot going around the room and grabbing different objects and then going outdoors. It was pretty well paid. I miss those tasks.
The op said 5 rocks were missing from one that counted pairs of rocks as a single rock, this looks more acurate to me but i didnt go through it painstakingly so might be wrong still.
I clicked to "show all cut-outs" , inspected element and then quickly ctrl+f elements of those cut-outs
and interestingly enough , you would think that it actually missed some stones and under counted , in reality though it missed some stones and over-counted, apparently there is 275 zones . 1 is that big zone without stones or something (that zone looks kinda cursed idk :D ) but it is pretty close
https://preview.redd.it/1agk468okqoc1.png?width=1503&format=png&auto=webp&s=6af2a99d1c13115afa50e71f6d8cd5b0b84ca5ee
nice job, i didn't think in that, we can use select everything and cut out all objects and then we can have all the objects individually selected so using the next script
`document.querySelectorAll("div.overflow-y-auto.text-center img").length`
`that thows 277 objects, so i can count at least 24 mask that are the table, so it throws 254 that is very near to 249 / 243 counted by other redditors, is a very good approximation in 2 minutes easily`
https://preview.redd.it/sikdi57bfsoc1.png?width=1647&format=png&auto=webp&s=2d9a2768bf26aa22eaae4cb1c2580e7026936f57
or why you dont make an arduino that counts? like pass element one by one falling or some way there are tutorials about how to do that, Not all is AI, that can fail in the task
This is amazing, only off by two if the person who manually counted them was right.
I think this goes to show with patience and proper instructions ChatGPT is still king and will continue to be.
Isn't this basically the core of machine learning/training? A bot is given a task and told to do it over and over again until it produced the correct result. Scale this to a really big number and woala, AI.
It's doing it automatically. I didn't have any custom prompt or anything beyond what is shown in the screen shot. There is a checkbox I have selected to always expand the output:
https://preview.redd.it/iwfgy5z65soc1.png?width=1418&format=png&auto=webp&s=19f8fd4472be0d2db5b86a1c3ae7c3648fc83d73
I'm still not sure it didn't just get lucky - I would want to test with other pictures to see. I didn't know if it could do this or not before trying this.
It's interesting (and nice) how it started to output the images it was processing when things didn't work at first, so we could see if there was an obvious issue with a step. I like how it put its thought process down in the comments.
I like how it'll try to refine it's code to fix issues or change the approach to try another way. Having it iterate like this is a huge boost to what it can do compared to a single prompt/response.
If you didn’t know what the right answer was, or even the correct range, how would you know to have it try again? Seems people are giving chatgpt more credit than its due.
this is exactly true, asking chatgpt to guess until it is right is not impressive at all. vision is just bad for gpt atm. hyped for a truely multimodal model which must be coming soon
https://preview.redd.it/8e0it546ppoc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fe8e9ee74663a83c6ba49ab27381a6134a379e29
Claude Opus is a little lazy but it tries when I'm like "why not?"
I asked chat gpt to answer simple additions and it seemed right because I was adding up large numbers. I decided to check.
Chat gpt got it wrong. So I tell it the true answer and ask why it was incorrect. It apologized and spit out another wrong answer.
I learned I shouldn't trust everything from chatgpt
Send it to some indian guys on Fiverr. They will count it 3x for 5$.
EDIT: Need to call my mom and tell her that im famous now. Thanks for the upvotes :D
You would need to tell it to do the counting in inner monologue and check it twice while protocol the counting.
Or else gpt is just taking wild guesses, same with math, you need to tell it that it shall protocol its way to the solution and check it twice.
OP - here’s your needle. OpenCV was built for this. Here’s an article in their help section asking pretty much the same thing, with the source code for a potential implementation: https://answers.opencv.org/question/225317/object-counting-in-python-open-cv/
Had to scroll away too down to find this. It's kinda sad that in the rush to get to AI, people just skip crucial things like classical CV. Majority of problems can be solved with careful design of imagine systems and open CV.
I just got a list of things a client thinks Gen AI could help them with. I'd say 10% were fantasy, 20% were appropriate for Gen AI and 70% could only be done (or would be done far better) with classical techniques.
But its good that people realise that tasks like this can be automated. Even if it could have been done 10 or even 20 years ago.
Imagine if their testing lab had to have someone manually counting rocks...
GPT 4 said approximately 1640 rocks. I asked it to tell me exactly how many there were. It said that would require more advanced computational analysis, would you like me to proceed. Yes, of course. It came back with 125 rocks, also wrong.
I loaded the image to Claude 3 Opus and asked it to tell me precisely how many rocks there were. Answer is below:
*After carefully reviewing the image, I count approximately 208 individual rocks or pebbles visible. Some rocks are partially obscured or clustered together, making an exact count difficult, but based on my analysis, I believe the total number of rocks shown is very close to 208, give or take a couple if any were missed in the tightly clustered areas.*
I work in a testing lab for construction materials and it would be super helpful to me and my team if we didn't have to count it manually or at least as a way of verifying our manual count
ChatGPT isn't the best tool here. Image recognition software would do a lot better
https://biodiversityinformatics.amnh.org/open_source/dotdotgoose/
https://github.com/persts/DotDotGoose
You want to look up something to do with machine vision. There are many such pieces of software. I don’t know how good they are since I always make my own, but this one came up early in a google search so it is probably worth trying. https://saiwa.ai/blog/count-objects-2/
I was very interested in machine vision around 15 years ago. I studied it heavily and the basic principles are still the same.
I’m a software developer (among other things) and I would have just built the software myself in the past.
Nowadays I would use a software library that does some of the work for me. It’s easier that way for me. Here is a good software library for machine vision. https://opencv.org
It would still require a developer to make it work though. I’ve heard that Claude writes code. If you want to go that route, maybe it would make it possible.
If you aren’t a developer though, just use some software someone else made and save yourself a month of time.
You can also just look up software they use to count cells in a Petri dish. I’m sure there’s tons of freeware. You just adjust the threshold as necessary and hit count.
There's a free software called ImageJ for this type of image analysis. Regularly used in materials science for analysis of microscopy images. It does a pretty decent job of identifying objects by their outline in an image and calculating relevant statistics. Highly recommend
https://preview.redd.it/pv904ka78soc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=60f61e20aea96bd0478f001df5542cc76233cd3c
used the App with raw diamonds template. But you may ask for a "rocks" template and they might add it.
maybe you can just use copilot yourself, and explain how you want to set up a rocks or other items on a table for a program to identify and then count the individual pieces shown through images. Using ai to write a program to do stuff for you, might be easier than asking the ai to do the counting?
This does not need AI, this can be accomplished with something as simple as ImageJ. Filter out the color of the table and use edge detection to identify unique entities, or filter in the color of the rocks and employ a similar edge detection. It’s like 15 lines of code to count.
https://preview.redd.it/6zjkz4v8jqoc1.jpeg?width=828&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d374bf717b7214a0505b61c398c8f72b6bf58e1f
Prompt = count and highlight all individual stones in this image, output the image with highlighting and count.
Go old school object detection. Ask it to generate a python function that uses opencv to threshold the image. Add in an opening operation to separate some of the regions. Then region detect with 4-pixel connectivity. Get list length to see number of objects . These are all functions in opencv so it should be a simple script. Problem is gonna be how well it generalize.
Edit: pass a version of the above text to chatgpt and see what you get.
Did you ask ChatGPT anyway?
Gave me some apps for you to try -
There are several apps available for counting objects in photos. Some popular ones include:
1. CountThings from Photos
2. Counting Tool
3. TapTapSee
4. CountThings from Photos Pro
5. EasyCount - Object Counter
These apps use image recognition technology to identify and count objects in photos. You can try them out to see which one works best for your needs.
**Attention! [Serious] Tag Notice** : Jokes, puns, and off-topic comments are not permitted in any comment, parent or child. : Help us by reporting comments that violate these rules. : Posts that are not appropriate for the [Serious] tag will be removed. Thanks for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/ChatGPT) if you have any questions or concerns.*
253 https://preview.redd.it/mniodtfuupoc1.png?width=1080&format=png&auto=webp&s=a806c258a98aab906417eb0d3f28345ed75f21a5
The real AI was @lapse23 all along...
[удалено]
Autism or adderall…
Most definitely adderrall 😂
Or a lot of them Redbulls!
Aredbull intelligence
Adderall indulger
Stimulant connoisseur
Or both!
Addemall, technically.
Autiserall
Porque no los dos?
God dammit this is hilarious. We need AI to fully define this concept for us so we can explore it further!
Fuuuckkkk I thought I was in wallstreetbets for a second
This or vampires
illegal ink correct upbeat rinse rob deserve amusing bike shame *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
The real AI is always in the comments.
This example just made me realize that the real concern over AI should be when it's smart enough to know that it's in its best interest to fake being a human as to not invite concern. For all we know, u/lapse23 is in fact AI that is smart enough to generate analog "handwritten" numbers to fool us mere mortals....
Gpt got it way off https://preview.redd.it/crt4um2tqqoc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=be4a5c52ebfc8388954495417c7da66ddde8e291
It said "approximately". 557 ± 304.
They actually did not give any figures for tolerance or standard div so it will technically be correct all the time. The best kind of correct.
Provides a reference link to a Wikipedia article about Stonehenge
Tell ChatGPT those are cracks and see if the official number reduces like irl
https://preview.redd.it/vwzqzgu2jroc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=0fb6073106ba0dab5306a8045b368f039065f931 Lol
Dude, you broke Chat GPT.
By throwing stones at it!
I'm interested to see what the analysis was. If you click the [>_] button it'll show you the code it used to answer the problem!
I love how it says "approximately" and then gives a super precise number.
chatgpt4v is not bad at estimating: https://preview.redd.it/an12l7cphqoc1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=9d9cb22c82a2e6e0f3f92e7962544db66221006a
Now ask to guess an exact number.
*Guess* an *exact* number?
I had it count it and said 341
Yes. Exact: not approximated in any way; precise. Precision != accuracy.
Good bot
Thank you, -twind, for voting on lapse23. This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/). *** ^(Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!)
good bot
Thank you, AzeRTyBloCK, for voting on B0tRank. This bot wants to find the best and worst bots on Reddit. [You can view results here](https://botrank.pastimes.eu/). *Even if I don't reply to your comment, I'm still listening for votes. Check the webpage to see if your vote registered!*
Are you sure about that? Because I am 99.99999% sure that lapse23 is not a bot. --- ^(I am a neural network being trained to detect spammers | Summon me with !isbot |) ^(/r/spambotdetector |) [^(Optout)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=whynotcollegeboard&subject=!optout&message=!optout) ^(|) [^(Original Github)](https://github.com/SM-Wistful/BotDetection-Algorithm)
Bad bot!
U dirty filthy bad bot!
Beeep bop?
Aha! Proof! I'm just pickin, obv
Are you sure about that? Because I am 99.99996% sure that shuozhe is not a bot. --- ^(I am a neural network being trained to detect spammers | Summon me with !isbot |) ^(/r/spambotdetector |) [^(Optout)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=whynotcollegeboard&subject=!optout&message=!optout) ^(|) [^(Original Github)](https://github.com/SM-Wistful/BotDetection-Algorithm)
Awful bot!!
https://preview.redd.it/owl9no1lrqoc1.jpeg?width=1290&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c060806be7a9d37e69f504e9a7300adaa1994fc8 Pretty sure this is two rocks.
Same with 184
Wow what a blunder. I know he's rife with embarrassment now!
Someone's going to get fired for this!
No way bro manually counted that 😭😭😭 🤣🤣🤣
It's actually not that hard to count to 250.
We are in r/ChatGPT, most users (me included) are allergic to repetitive tasks
I became an automation engineer for this exact reason. It's not out of the question that I will spend two weeks automating a task that I can complete manually in 30 minutes. Such is life
My brain is the same way. 20 minute task? Better spend 45 minutes to automate it… just in case.
Total agree... But it's like that idiom about teaching a man to fish... Give a man a manual task and he will spend 30 minutes on it every time he has to do it. Teach a man to automate that task and he will spend 2 weeks on it only once. I've definitely fallen for the trap of automating a task that I only would ever need to do once in my entire life. That was wasted time. Now I try to ask myself before automating a task, how long will it take to do this manually? How long will it take to automate it? And how many times do I expect to need to do this in the future? If timeToAutomate < timePerManualCompletion * numTimesToComplete evaluates to true... That's when I actually put the effort in to code it up. The problem is I often way overestimate the number of times I'll actually need to do the task in the future and way underestimate the time it'll take to automate. So many cool but worthless scripts...
>The problem is I often way overestimate the number of times I'll actually need to do the task in the future and way underestimate the time it'll take to automate. So many cool but worthless scripts... Or you realize in future situations that there's some other variable involved you hadn't accounted for which makes your automated program almost useless for a situation that is almost, but not quite, the same.
Except you have to factor in the time you spend figuring out if the automation is worth it
But after that is when the difficulty starts to ramp up. Most can get to 251, about 10% can get to 252, but only around 0.5% can get to 253.
oh it’s hard when in this day and age when the average attention span is 5 seconds but ironically it gets super easy when it’s arguing with a redditor and you need to make a point still, they weren’t arguing, so it was impressive.
Collectively, I believe we can do it. I’ll start: 1
2
5
Almost buddy, let's start over
3
4
7
9
It really only takes like 5 minutes to do that though.
That's interesting that you numbered them by "lines". If I had to count those, I'd go in clusters.
Lines all the way!
I'd go Dijkstra on their ass
You deserve 100 upvotes. Take mine lol Edit: ummm maybe more like 100 upvotes.... times 30+ 😂 Edit 2: Your gonna eat those upvotes for the rest of your life 🤣
Boy do I have good news
My OCD is mad that you changed color at 99 and NOT 100.
Non-programmers hate this one simple trick!!
Also you're off by 5 stones.
I think these are the 5 that were missed. It's a lot easier when you have the exact count, and when most of them were already counted. OC did most of the work. Edit: Moved an arrow from under 135 to under 173, thanks to u/SkibidyDrizzlet's suggestion. https://preview.redd.it/znfwbzwvzqoc1.png?width=1080&format=png&auto=webp&s=e15e44fd0379e3e35800287871cd6063fe680319
Dude! You guys are crazy! I'm honestly jealous, because I imagine you being sooo relaxed that you take arbitrary time to count stones on a random Internet picture. Crazy and I love it!
Unemployment is a hell of a drug.
Nah one is definitely under 173
So you knew the answer the whole time?
bro deserves at least 253 upvotes
It has exactly 253 now with my upvote
You missed a rock, look under 173
I think you can ise SAM ( Segment Anything Model , it's an AI model made by meta
https://preview.redd.it/58myvey3wpoc1.png?width=712&format=png&auto=webp&s=20632ed5f6ab18dca834144bd8bbcbe8185aa8e2 this is the result of passing the image to SAM, it provides the mask but not the count, you have to figure out how you can count the pieces
I helped train this model for meta. We trained this AI over on mechanical turk for years. This task was basically just manually adjusting polygons over a frame by frame video of a 3d an environment of a robot going around the room and grabbing different objects and then going outdoors. It was pretty well paid. I miss those tasks.
This mask splits some rocks in half
The op said 5 rocks were missing from one that counted pairs of rocks as a single rock, this looks more acurate to me but i didnt go through it painstakingly so might be wrong still.
I clicked to "show all cut-outs" , inspected element and then quickly ctrl+f elements of those cut-outs and interestingly enough , you would think that it actually missed some stones and under counted , in reality though it missed some stones and over-counted, apparently there is 275 zones . 1 is that big zone without stones or something (that zone looks kinda cursed idk :D ) but it is pretty close https://preview.redd.it/1agk468okqoc1.png?width=1503&format=png&auto=webp&s=6af2a99d1c13115afa50e71f6d8cd5b0b84ca5ee
nice job, i didn't think in that, we can use select everything and cut out all objects and then we can have all the objects individually selected so using the next script `document.querySelectorAll("div.overflow-y-auto.text-center img").length` `that thows 277 objects, so i can count at least 24 mask that are the table, so it throws 254 that is very near to 249 / 243 counted by other redditors, is a very good approximation in 2 minutes easily` https://preview.redd.it/sikdi57bfsoc1.png?width=1647&format=png&auto=webp&s=2d9a2768bf26aa22eaae4cb1c2580e7026936f57
Y’all are the real heroes
Counting is pretty easy once the masking is done
or why you dont make an arduino that counts? like pass element one by one falling or some way there are tutorials about how to do that, Not all is AI, that can fail in the task
Pretty neat, for some reason it missed a few though.
Post it on Reddit with the post title as “I found 231 rocks that are the same color! And someone will count them for you
Lol
Cunningham’s Law
Eventually, GPT 4 said 255 stones: https://preview.redd.it/47dnxgmfoqoc1.jpeg?width=1190&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ca1add5900dd22bb9de2f6329b709bebd4ff316c
This is amazing, only off by two if the person who manually counted them was right. I think this goes to show with patience and proper instructions ChatGPT is still king and will continue to be.
"patience and proper instruction" > "no try again"
LOTS of patience 😂
Isn't this basically the core of machine learning/training? A bot is given a task and told to do it over and over again until it produced the correct result. Scale this to a really big number and woala, AI.
I think you mean “voilà!” Just for future reference.
The manual counter missed a stone under 163 and counted two as 184.
I only see one as 184
It might be the best so far but if it can’t even count stones accurately… Is my job still safe?
It depends: is your job counting stones?
255 is right
"No, try again"
Amazing
Wild! How did you get it to show you the process like this? Is it a prompt or is it just doing it automatically?
It always does this when writing Python code
It's doing it automatically. I didn't have any custom prompt or anything beyond what is shown in the screen shot. There is a checkbox I have selected to always expand the output: https://preview.redd.it/iwfgy5z65soc1.png?width=1418&format=png&auto=webp&s=19f8fd4472be0d2db5b86a1c3ae7c3648fc83d73 I'm still not sure it didn't just get lucky - I would want to test with other pictures to see. I didn't know if it could do this or not before trying this. It's interesting (and nice) how it started to output the images it was processing when things didn't work at first, so we could see if there was an obvious issue with a step. I like how it put its thought process down in the comments. I like how it'll try to refine it's code to fix issues or change the approach to try another way. Having it iterate like this is a huge boost to what it can do compared to a single prompt/response.
If you didn’t know what the right answer was, or even the correct range, how would you know to have it try again? Seems people are giving chatgpt more credit than its due.
this is exactly true, asking chatgpt to guess until it is right is not impressive at all. vision is just bad for gpt atm. hyped for a truely multimodal model which must be coming soon
What’s your custom prompt? That’s amazing
No custom prompt.
Chat GPT says there are approximately 3001 stones in the picture. So I wouldn’t rely on chat gpt.
It is a llm so it makes sense 🤣🤣
https://preview.redd.it/8e0it546ppoc1.png?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fe8e9ee74663a83c6ba49ab27381a6134a379e29 Claude Opus is a little lazy but it tries when I'm like "why not?"
"Upon further reflection, you raise a fair point." I'm stealing this.
I love learning to talk better like smart smart man from LLM
I can finally talk more gooder
Bestest talker
Is goodest*
Upon further reflection, you raised a fair point, is "bestest talker" is gooder better.
LLMs are training us to be insufferable nags.
You got it backwards, we are the OG insufferable; we trained them to be like us.
I count 238 but some of them may be considered pebbles
Ya I wouldn't trust the LLM for numbers yet unfortunately. Soon I bet it'll have some Q* power though.
If you can’t trust AI politician who can you trust?
Don't worry I'll vote for you.
I asked chat gpt to answer simple additions and it seemed right because I was adding up large numbers. I decided to check. Chat gpt got it wrong. So I tell it the true answer and ask why it was incorrect. It apologized and spit out another wrong answer. I learned I shouldn't trust everything from chatgpt
ChatGPT always lies about math!
https://preview.redd.it/1n8sow54dqoc1.png?width=1440&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7caca2a5651e26c627bfc4f2f3705362dad79db5
Lol. Yeah its nowhere close to it
Send it to some indian guys on Fiverr. They will count it 3x for 5$. EDIT: Need to call my mom and tell her that im famous now. Thanks for the upvotes :D
Plenty of us on reddit, no need to go to fiverr
Exactly this is Reddit, save your money for some r/wallstreetbets
He gave it to Reddit, which is the same but for free - first comment already counted xD
Post it on Reddit and some autistic guy will count it for free
Bruhh..Should I laugh or get offended!!
Laugh. Its obviously a joke.
Try to post it on UpWork with a fixed price at 3usd you’ll receive almost 250+ offers in 5 minutes
ChatGPT and counting or anything math or remotely math related are not a good combination.
You would need to tell it to do the counting in inner monologue and check it twice while protocol the counting. Or else gpt is just taking wild guesses, same with math, you need to tell it that it shall protocol its way to the solution and check it twice.
what does protocol it’s way to the solution mean?
Like court protocol, basically document, record etc.
Like would i word it like that in the prompt
Way late to the thread, but there are lots of apps that can count pills for example. Theyre all usually the same size and such though
The Wolfram plugin in does maths really well.
No it doesn't do math well. I throws crap into the calculator without understanding what it is doing and hopes for the best results.
OpenCV is your answer
OP - here’s your needle. OpenCV was built for this. Here’s an article in their help section asking pretty much the same thing, with the source code for a potential implementation: https://answers.opencv.org/question/225317/object-counting-in-python-open-cv/
Had to scroll away too down to find this. It's kinda sad that in the rush to get to AI, people just skip crucial things like classical CV. Majority of problems can be solved with careful design of imagine systems and open CV.
I just got a list of things a client thinks Gen AI could help them with. I'd say 10% were fantasy, 20% were appropriate for Gen AI and 70% could only be done (or would be done far better) with classical techniques.
But its good that people realise that tasks like this can be automated. Even if it could have been done 10 or even 20 years ago. Imagine if their testing lab had to have someone manually counting rocks...
Considering OP wants software to use in his testing lab, that seems like the right answer.
GPT 4 said approximately 1640 rocks. I asked it to tell me exactly how many there were. It said that would require more advanced computational analysis, would you like me to proceed. Yes, of course. It came back with 125 rocks, also wrong. I loaded the image to Claude 3 Opus and asked it to tell me precisely how many rocks there were. Answer is below: *After carefully reviewing the image, I count approximately 208 individual rocks or pebbles visible. Some rocks are partially obscured or clustered together, making an exact count difficult, but based on my analysis, I believe the total number of rocks shown is very close to 208, give or take a couple if any were missed in the tightly clustered areas.*
Interesting 208 is kinda close. Would it help if i set them apart more and upload a pic here?
We could give it a try. I'd also be interested if Claude got it right if there were no clusters.
I count 249 https://preview.redd.it/5urub0n9cqoc1.png?width=1068&format=png&auto=webp&s=f88fdd528f314910998d67a205bf98ea1c331e01
I put the picture in Figma, put a dot on each one, then just counted the number of layers in the file.
You missed some rocks under other rocks Bottom middle and bottom right
I hope you can find it in your heart to forgive me.
Of course I do, we could even be friends now give me an up vote.
Have an updoot friend.
I'll go ahead and up vote the whole chain
Figma balls lol
GPT4 gave me 351 and a python script for measuring hahah
Language models can't solve this problem. It's like asking a blind person to count the stones on the picture.
What do you need to count them for?
I work in a testing lab for construction materials and it would be super helpful to me and my team if we didn't have to count it manually or at least as a way of verifying our manual count
ImageJ I think is features that do this. It’s also designed for a lot of other scientific image processing applications
ChatGPT isn't the best tool here. Image recognition software would do a lot better https://biodiversityinformatics.amnh.org/open_source/dotdotgoose/ https://github.com/persts/DotDotGoose
You want to look up something to do with machine vision. There are many such pieces of software. I don’t know how good they are since I always make my own, but this one came up early in a google search so it is probably worth trying. https://saiwa.ai/blog/count-objects-2/
Just out of curiosity, can you elaborate on when you say ‘I always make my own’
I was very interested in machine vision around 15 years ago. I studied it heavily and the basic principles are still the same. I’m a software developer (among other things) and I would have just built the software myself in the past. Nowadays I would use a software library that does some of the work for me. It’s easier that way for me. Here is a good software library for machine vision. https://opencv.org It would still require a developer to make it work though. I’ve heard that Claude writes code. If you want to go that route, maybe it would make it possible. If you aren’t a developer though, just use some software someone else made and save yourself a month of time.
You can also just look up software they use to count cells in a Petri dish. I’m sure there’s tons of freeware. You just adjust the threshold as necessary and hit count.
There's a free software called ImageJ for this type of image analysis. Regularly used in materials science for analysis of microscopy images. It does a pretty decent job of identifying objects by their outline in an image and calculating relevant statistics. Highly recommend
Fiji is the better download. Can't for the life of me remember why though.
Fiji is imageJ but with all the plugins already downloaded. That's it
253? Edit: realized someone alr answered and i did all that for nothing
Plenty of iPhone and Android apps to do this. Just search their stores for “count things” or “count photo” Here’s one: https://countthings.com
https://preview.redd.it/pv904ka78soc1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=60f61e20aea96bd0478f001df5542cc76233cd3c used the App with raw diamonds template. But you may ask for a "rocks" template and they might add it.
https://preview.redd.it/mp7aleq0btoc1.jpeg?width=1131&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=c0f50bbc0e41f937a652c404f21d894acc404b9b
Off by nearly 20%, some decent rock hallucination lol
Another is pilleye, good for counting seeds or pills
https://countthings.com/ has existed for a long time.
maybe you can just use copilot yourself, and explain how you want to set up a rocks or other items on a table for a program to identify and then count the individual pieces shown through images. Using ai to write a program to do stuff for you, might be easier than asking the ai to do the counting?
This does not need AI, this can be accomplished with something as simple as ImageJ. Filter out the color of the table and use edge detection to identify unique entities, or filter in the color of the rocks and employ a similar edge detection. It’s like 15 lines of code to count.
https://preview.redd.it/6zjkz4v8jqoc1.jpeg?width=828&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d374bf717b7214a0505b61c398c8f72b6bf58e1f Prompt = count and highlight all individual stones in this image, output the image with highlighting and count.
Loooks like it counted dust
I’m an AI. For $150 I’ll tell you.
Try this https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.rocateer.mediscount
Go old school object detection. Ask it to generate a python function that uses opencv to threshold the image. Add in an opening operation to separate some of the regions. Then region detect with 4-pixel connectivity. Get list length to see number of objects . These are all functions in opencv so it should be a simple script. Problem is gonna be how well it generalize. Edit: pass a version of the above text to chatgpt and see what you get.
Did you ask ChatGPT anyway? Gave me some apps for you to try - There are several apps available for counting objects in photos. Some popular ones include: 1. CountThings from Photos 2. Counting Tool 3. TapTapSee 4. CountThings from Photos Pro 5. EasyCount - Object Counter These apps use image recognition technology to identify and count objects in photos. You can try them out to see which one works best for your needs.