4 ms·
5 days for Ai is by no mean short! If it can solve it, it would need perhaps 1-2 hours. If it can not, 5 days continuous running would produce gibberish only. W
by sinuhe69 8mo ago
5 days for Ai is by no mean short! If it can solve it, it would need perhaps 1-2 hours. If it can not, 5 days continuous running would produce gibberish only. We can safely assume that such private models will run inferences entirely on dedicated hardware, sharing with nobody. So if they could not solve the problems, it's not due to any artificial constraint or lack of resources, far from it.
The 5 days window, however, is a sweat spot because it likely prevents cheating by hiring a math PhD and feed the AI with hints and ideas.
- energy123 8mo ago5 days is short for memetic propagation on social media to reach everyone who has their own harness and agentic setup that wants to have a go.
- zozbot234 8mo agoThat's not really how it works, the recent Erdos proofs in Lean were done by a specialized proprietary model (Aristotle by Harmonic) that's specifically trained for this task. Normal agents are not effective.
- energy123 8mo agoWhy did you omit the other AI-generated Erdos proofs not done by a proprietary model, which occurred on timescales stretched across significantly longer time than 5 days?
- zozbot234 8mo agoThose were not really "proofs" by the standard of 1stproof. The only way an AI can possibly convince an unsympathetic peer reviewer that its proof is correct is to write it completely in a formal system like Lean. The so-called "proofs" done with GPT were half baked and required significant human input, hints, fixing after the fact etc. which is enough to disqualify them from this effort.
- energy123 8mo agoThat wasn't my recollection. The individual who generated one of the proofs did a write-up for his methodology and it didn't involve a human correcting the model.