3 ms·

>OpenAI has data access to much but not all of the dataset Their head mathematician says they have the full dataset, except a holdout set which they're current

>OpenAI has data access to much but not all of the dataset Their head mathematician says they have the full dataset, except a holdout set which they're currently developing (i.e. doesn't exist yet): https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1i4n0r5/comment/m7x1vnx/ https://www.reddit.com/r/singularity/comments/1i4n0r5/commen...

menaerus 2y ago
Thanks for the link. A holdout set which is yet to be used to verify the 25% claim. He also says that he doesn't believe that OpenAI would self-sabotage themselves by tricking the internal benchmarking performance since this will get easily exposed, either by the results from a holdout set or by the public repeating the benchmarks themselves. Seems reasonable to me.
- optimalsolver 2y ago
  >the public repeating the benchmarks themselves The public has no access to this benchmark. In fact, everyone thought it was all locked up in a vault at Epoch AI HQ, but looks like Sam Altman has a copy on his bedside table.
  - menaerus 2y ago
    Perhaps what he meant is that the public will be able to benchmark the model themselves by throwing different difficulty math problems at it and not necessarily the FrontierMath benchmark. It should become pretty obvious if they were faking the results or not.
    - optimalsolver 2y ago
      It's been found [0] that slightly varying Putnam problems causes a 30% drop in o1-Preview accuracy, but that hasn't put a dent in OAI's hype. There's absolutely no comeuppance for juicing benchmarks, especially ones no one has access to. If performance of o3 doesn't meet expectations, there'll be plenty of people making excuses for it ("You're prompting it wrong!", "That's just not its domain!"). [0] https://openreview.net/forum?id=YXnwlZe0yf&noteId=yrsGpHd0Sf https://openreview.net/forum?id=YXnwlZe0yf&noteId=yrsGpHd0Sf
      - menaerus 2y ago
        > If performance of o3 doesn't meet expectations, there'll be plenty of people making excuses for it I agree and I can definitely see that happening but it is also not impossible, given the incentive and impact of this technology, for some other company/community to create yet another, perhaps, FrontierMath-like benchmark to cross-validate the results. I also don't disagree that it is not impossible for OpenAI to have faked these results. Time will tell.

menaerus 2y ago

Thanks for the link. A holdout set which is yet to be used to verify the 25% claim. He also says that he doesn't believe that OpenAI would self-sabotage themselves by tricking the internal benchmarking performance since this will get easily exposed, either by the results from a holdout set or by the public repeating the benchmarks themselves. Seems reasonable to me.

optimalsolver 2y ago
>the public repeating the benchmarks themselves The public has no access to this benchmark. In fact, everyone thought it was all locked up in a vault at Epoch AI HQ, but looks like Sam Altman has a copy on his bedside table.
- menaerus 2y ago
  Perhaps what he meant is that the public will be able to benchmark the model themselves by throwing different difficulty math problems at it and not necessarily the FrontierMath benchmark. It should become pretty obvious if they were faking the results or not.
  - optimalsolver 2y ago
    It's been found [0] that slightly varying Putnam problems causes a 30% drop in o1-Preview accuracy, but that hasn't put a dent in OAI's hype. There's absolutely no comeuppance for juicing benchmarks, especially ones no one has access to. If performance of o3 doesn't meet expectations, there'll be plenty of people making excuses for it ("You're prompting it wrong!", "That's just not its domain!"). [0] https://openreview.net/forum?id=YXnwlZe0yf&noteId=yrsGpHd0Sf https://openreview.net/forum?id=YXnwlZe0yf&noteId=yrsGpHd0Sf
    - menaerus 2y ago
      > If performance of o3 doesn't meet expectations, there'll be plenty of people making excuses for it I agree and I can definitely see that happening but it is also not impossible, given the incentive and impact of this technology, for some other company/community to create yet another, perhaps, FrontierMath-like benchmark to cross-validate the results. I also don't disagree that it is not impossible for OpenAI to have faked these results. Time will tell.