OpenAI has a deep bench. I bet they pushed this out to change the narrative about deepseek
Also named specifically to muddle the SEO for the term "deep." Nothing that OpenAI does is unintentional.
Introducing deep research
41–50 of 445 posts
Re: Introducing deep research
#42"will find, analyze, and synthesize hundreds of online sources"
Synthesize? Seems like the wrong word -- I think they would want to say something like, "analyze, and synthesize useful outputs from hundreds of online sources"..
Re: Introducing deep research
#43Feels like only a matter of time before these crawlers are blocked from large swathes of the internet. I understand that they’re already prohibited from Reddit and YouTube. If that spreads, this approach might be in trouble.
I suppose there is an equilibrium, where sites that penalize these types of crawlers will also get less traffic from people reading ai citations, so for many sites the upsides of allowing it will be greater than the downsides.
Re: Introducing deep research
#44Eating popcorn while the scaling doubters scramble to move the goalposts for the nth time.
Re: Introducing deep research
#45Not sure if people picked up on it, but this is being powered by the unreleased o3 model. Which might explain why it leaps ahead in benchmarks considerably and aligns with the claims o3 is too expensive to release publicly. Seems to be quite an impressive model and the leading out of Google, DeepSeek and Perplexity.
Interesting, thanks for highlighting! Did not pick up on that. Re:"leading", tho:
Effectiveness in this task environment is well beyond the specific model involved, no? Plus they'd be fools (IMHO) to only use one size of model for each step in a research task -- sure, o3 might be an advantage when synthesizing a final answer or choosing between conflicting sources, but there are many, many steps required to get to that point.
Re: Introducing deep research
#46I think we're all reaching AI fatigue. Fewer and fewer people care anymore
Especially this is not a breakthrough justifying a 340B USD valuation, but rather the work that junior developers can do; implement a loop of Bing Searches connected to an LLM.
Re: Introducing deep research
#47I feel that a lot of this can already be achieved via aider (not affiliated), and any of the top models.
Do you have any benchmarks to back up your 'feelings'?
I really don't like the snarky tone of the parent comment.
Nonetheless, I don't think this is even something that can easily be benchmarked. I'd recommend you take a look at aider [1], and consider how I drew similarities between it and what's presented here.
Has ClosedAI presented any benchmarks / evaluation protocols?
Re: Introducing deep research
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
Are you exploiting open knowledge creators, using their work without compensation?
The creators are aware that a human is using this, can we say the same for AI, does it have their consent?
Then consent is granted by transitive property because these AI are yielded by humans.
Re: Introducing deep research
#49I'm sorry but what the fuck is this product pitch?
Anyone who's done any kind of substantial document research knows that it's a NIGHTMARE of chasing loose ends & citogenesis.
Trusting an LLM to critically evaluate every source and to be deeply suspect of any unproven claim is a ridiculous thing to do. These are not hard reasoning systems, they are probabilistic language models.
Re: Introducing deep research
#50OpenAI has a deep bench. I bet they pushed this out to change the narrative about deepseek
Also named specifically to muddle the SEO for the term "deep." Nothing that OpenAI does is unintentional.
I have never believed a conspiracy theory more instantly. Deep Search vs. DeepSeek is way more than enough to confuse the average layman! Especially when you're googling something you heard about at work a few hours ago, or on Bloomberg TV