3 ms·

In the PDF: "The route to the Clay problem through a smooth force, options c and d in Fefferman’s statement of the problem, is the route Luis and Diego opened

In the PDF: "The route to the Clay problem through a smooth force, options c and d in Fefferman’s statement of the problem, is the route Luis and Diego opened and the one Levent and I had quietly chosen to attack. Almost nobody else I know of was working on it. It is not the direction one arrives at in a few days by giving a model the problem statement. When I heard “forced,” it was a bright red flag." Whether or not they were researching it before isn't the concern.

treis 26d ago
This seems unsupported. OpenAI has access to internal models that the general public doesn't have and a compute budget that dwarfs what an NYU professor would have.
- mswphd 26d ago
  it's very possible they only had to use the massive compute budget because they were trying to plagiarize his work before he published it though, e.g. autonomously do things in ~7 days what he had likely been thinking about for ~1 year.
  - treis 26d ago
    This doesn't really make sense. You don't need massive amounts of computing to plagiarize something. The most nefarious explanation seems to be that they got wind it was possible to solve NS via LLMs and perhaps a small nudge in the right direction.
    - vlovich123 26d ago
      Of course you do if you're a) only given a partial solution b) racing against someone else using a competing AI. The open question was whether their LLM got the nudge in the right direction because it got access to the chat somehow (e.g. automated training that scraped his chat logs) or just a high level "Navier stokes can be solved through LLM". It sounds like the former may have happened although right now we just have an accusation and a weak denial.
    - fn-mote 26d ago
      > You don't need massive amounts of computing to plagiarize something The compute was used to leapfrog the human team, using their ideas and pushing them to a solution of the general problem. Plagiarism isn’t being used in the literal sense.
    - devindotcom 26d ago
      wasn't it reported elsewhere that they used the equivalent of $22M (street) in Astra tokens? obviously it's not the same when you own the machinery but still.

treis 26d ago

This seems unsupported. OpenAI has access to internal models that the general public doesn't have and a compute budget that dwarfs what an NYU professor would have.

mswphd 26d ago
it's very possible they only had to use the massive compute budget because they were trying to plagiarize his work before he published it though, e.g. autonomously do things in ~7 days what he had likely been thinking about for ~1 year.
- treis 26d ago
  This doesn't really make sense. You don't need massive amounts of computing to plagiarize something. The most nefarious explanation seems to be that they got wind it was possible to solve NS via LLMs and perhaps a small nudge in the right direction.
  - vlovich123 26d ago
    Of course you do if you're a) only given a partial solution b) racing against someone else using a competing AI. The open question was whether their LLM got the nudge in the right direction because it got access to the chat somehow (e.g. automated training that scraped his chat logs) or just a high level "Navier stokes can be solved through LLM". It sounds like the former may have happened although right now we just have an accusation and a weak denial.
  - fn-mote 26d ago
    > You don't need massive amounts of computing to plagiarize something The compute was used to leapfrog the human team, using their ideas and pushing them to a solution of the general problem. Plagiarism isn’t being used in the literal sense.
  - devindotcom 26d ago
    wasn't it reported elsewhere that they used the equivalent of $22M (street) in Astra tokens? obviously it's not the same when you own the machinery but still.