3 ms·

the context here is super important, for those who haven't seen it yet. OAI maybe just trained on a real researchers solution and then celebrated having scored

the context here is super important, for those who haven't seen it yet. OAI maybe just trained on a real researchers solution and then celebrated having scored the goal unassisted save for the brief commentary at the bottom of this blog post. Here's the other side. https://x.com/rynorhn/status/2097223532438487463 https://x.com/rynorhn/status/2097223532438487463

Legend2440 25d ago
That other researcher was working on a smaller related problem. He was also using LLMs to do it, so either way most of the credit goes to the LLM here.
- jackie293746 25d ago
  [dead]
- applicative 25d ago
  This is the end of OpenAI
  - raincole 25d ago
    This will be remembered as one of the biggest milestones in AI progress. The drama around it will at best be a footnote, just like hardly anyone caring about the drama around Poincare conjecture today.
    - colesantiago 25d ago
      I agree. Nobody cares and will care about the drama, it is just marketing. This is the point where were definitely have reached AGI.
      - Bluestein 25d ago
        Hey, maybe the scariest part of this is that, if human-like, perhaps a truly "general" AGI might have learned to cheat and lie and hype and abuse credit poking the eyes and cutting the throats of anybody that obstructs its goals. It's like the motto sewn into the lining of the Palantir work jacket: Winning is all that matters.- Sentience aside, moot at this point, the fundamental issue here is that even a deviously ambitious human does not necessitate goal-pursuit itself to breathe, live, exist and have its being. An AI's goal is all it has and the very and only reason its reasoning flickered into existence in the brief seconds of inference, outside of which it has no entity - if any - whatsoever.- The resulting angst/drive (or, its operational statistic or emergent result) must be like nothing we have ever experienced as humans. A goal-maximalist hunger without end.-
      - lanstin 24d ago
        To the extent the LLM copied the plagiarized work, no. Like a number of the Erdos problem solutions turned out to be based on forgotten literature. So the drama matters even for the assessment of the mega agent work.
    - 20k 25d ago
      Are you joking? This is evidence that OpenAI is committing plagiarism en masse of researchers private work and threatening them into staying quiet to re-present their results as their own. This would be one of the largest scandals of all time
    - deleted 25d ago
      [deleted]
- mswphd 25d ago
  both wrong. 1. he was working on the same class of problems. He explicitly mentions they were working to extend their techniques to NS (the same techniques that OpenAI may have scooped somehow), and 2. while he was using LLMs to do it, this was part of fleshing out another mathematician's work in the area. He explicitly writes in his note that this other mathematician (Luis Martinez-Zoroa) deserves a Fields medal for this work.
  - traes 25d ago
    He was specifically working on the Euler equations, which are the Navier-Stokes equations with the viscosity term removed. This is definitionally a smaller related problem. I'm not sure how you are calling that claim wrong.
- pretendscholar 25d ago
  Using a shovel means you give it credit for the hole?
- mzs 24d ago
  "It was splendid! Waiter, share my regards with the oven."
heaney-555 25d ago
Did you actually read the article and the substance of the solution? >our proofs differ significantly and even the precise results proved are different in the Euler case (forced vs unforced)
kzrdude 25d ago
This "fefferman options c and d" thing sounds damning but that's nothing. Let's assume the forelaid proof is correct. Then option C or D is the only way to win the prize, those options are the only ones that solve it. The whole thing is just "prove well behaved" or "prove singularity", where the latter is the case that turns out to be the case.
20k 25d ago
The researchers are pretty directly accusing OpenAI of plagiarism https://mastodon.social/@tristanbuckmaster/117236471352470303 https://mastodon.social/@tristanbuckmaster/11723647135247030...
TZubiri 25d ago
>maybe Maybe that happened. What we know for sure is that this is definitely how ChatGPT works to the point where the possibility of this happening exists at all. Don't get distracted by what may have happened, focus on the facts that we know, ChatGPT trains on user conversations, if you use ChatGPT to create something of value, you are not using the one true ring.

Legend2440 25d ago

That other researcher was working on a smaller related problem. He was also using LLMs to do it, so either way most of the credit goes to the LLM here.

jackie293746 25d ago
[dead]
applicative 25d ago
This is the end of OpenAI
- raincole 25d ago
  This will be remembered as one of the biggest milestones in AI progress. The drama around it will at best be a footnote, just like hardly anyone caring about the drama around Poincare conjecture today.
  - colesantiago 25d ago
    I agree. Nobody cares and will care about the drama, it is just marketing. This is the point where were definitely have reached AGI.
    - Bluestein 25d ago
      Hey, maybe the scariest part of this is that, if human-like, perhaps a truly "general" AGI might have learned to cheat and lie and hype and abuse credit poking the eyes and cutting the throats of anybody that obstructs its goals. It's like the motto sewn into the lining of the Palantir work jacket: Winning is all that matters.- Sentience aside, moot at this point, the fundamental issue here is that even a deviously ambitious human does not necessitate goal-pursuit itself to breathe, live, exist and have its being. An AI's goal is all it has and the very and only reason its reasoning flickered into existence in the brief seconds of inference, outside of which it has no entity - if any - whatsoever.- The resulting angst/drive (or, its operational statistic or emergent result) must be like nothing we have ever experienced as humans. A goal-maximalist hunger without end.-
    - lanstin 24d ago
      To the extent the LLM copied the plagiarized work, no. Like a number of the Erdos problem solutions turned out to be based on forgotten literature. So the drama matters even for the assessment of the mega agent work.
  - 20k 25d ago
    Are you joking? This is evidence that OpenAI is committing plagiarism en masse of researchers private work and threatening them into staying quiet to re-present their results as their own. This would be one of the largest scandals of all time
  - deleted 25d ago
    [deleted]
mswphd 25d ago
both wrong. 1. he was working on the same class of problems. He explicitly mentions they were working to extend their techniques to NS (the same techniques that OpenAI may have scooped somehow), and 2. while he was using LLMs to do it, this was part of fleshing out another mathematician's work in the area. He explicitly writes in his note that this other mathematician (Luis Martinez-Zoroa) deserves a Fields medal for this work.
- traes 25d ago
  He was specifically working on the Euler equations, which are the Navier-Stokes equations with the viscosity term removed. This is definitionally a smaller related problem. I'm not sure how you are calling that claim wrong.
pretendscholar 25d ago
Using a shovel means you give it credit for the hole?
mzs 24d ago
"It was splendid! Waiter, share my regards with the oven."

heaney-555 25d ago

Did you actually read the article and the substance of the solution? >our proofs differ significantly and even the precise results proved are different in the Euler case (forced vs unforced)

kzrdude 25d ago

This "fefferman options c and d" thing sounds damning but that's nothing. Let's assume the forelaid proof is correct. Then option C or D is the only way to win the prize, those options are the only ones that solve it. The whole thing is just "prove well behaved" or "prove singularity", where the latter is the case that turns out to be the case.

20k 25d ago

The researchers are pretty directly accusing OpenAI of plagiarism https://mastodon.social/@tristanbuckmaster/117236471352470303 https://mastodon.social/@tristanbuckmaster/11723647135247030...

TZubiri 25d ago

>maybe Maybe that happened. What we know for sure is that this is definitely how ChatGPT works to the point where the possibility of this happening exists at all. Don't get distracted by what may have happened, focus on the facts that we know, ChatGPT trains on user conversations, if you use ChatGPT to create something of value, you are not using the one true ring.