Live data from Hacker News

GPT-6 Astra

openai.com

131–140 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#132
post #56

Just two days ago, a preprint by Julia Stadlmann went up on arXiv [0] improving the prime gap from 246 to 240. Now OpenAI announces Astra has shown a gap of 186 [1]. That must really blow. [0] https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.31126 [1] https://cdn.openai.com/pdf/51126fac-1b68-4128-9666-c908bcc16...

With very little review: https://github.com/openai/PrimeGaps186/blob/main/formalizati...

"No independent human semantic review. Whole-file sorry counts and a complete auxiliary-declaration audit are not established; separate declaration lint has not been run."

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#133
post #51

> GPT-6 Astra’s monitorability has decreased relative to GPT-5.6 Sol. We have performed significant investigations on the monitorability and controllability of GPT-6 Astra. We have found that GPT-6 Astra is more capable of controlling its own CoT than GPT 5.6-Sol, and less likely to include incriminating information in its CoT. In adversarial settings (where we push the model to evade our monitors) we find that the m…

[dead]

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#134
post #10

$10 per million input tokens and $50 per million output tokens sol is $4 / $20

2.5x more expensive than Sol. Can expect 2.5x more usage in Codex subscription. Sol is already brutal (even after their recent fixes, it's just a token-hungry model: I go through a full 20x account per day, on Sol Med/High standard speed, with ~2 threads). I hope the efficiency gains are true, since their token efficiency claims for Sol were bullshit.

If you are telling the truth you might want to check your network for any weird connections to Chinese LLM transit stations.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#135
This is wild: OpenAI is basically declaring that AGI is here.

https://www.theverge.com/ai-artificial-intelligence/989601/o...

“If we fast-forward a couple of years, and we look back and say, ‘When was it, really, that AGI was created?’ I think it’s going to be about this time, and I think it might be about this model,” OpenAI president Greg Brockman said during a Thursday press briefing. Later in the call, he added, “For me personally, I do think we’re there … I think it’s not unreasonable to feel that we are now in the AGI era.”

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#136
post #45

I guess this "limited set of organizations" is just the standard now. It's just incredibly deflating to see my future as a second class citizen has already come

More optimistic take: we'll only be second-class for a few months, if the pattern of Chinese models catching-up holds.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#137
Finally, OpenAI has a Fable/Mythos class model. 5.6 Sol felt like 5.5 on steroids, probably just a different checkpoint with a lot more RL post training.

I wouldn't be surprised if there are some conceptual similarities to the kind of latent reasoning Anthropic sees in claude's J-space, although those aren't the same thing.

Recurrent/looped transformers themselves aren't a new concept, but it's interesting to finally see this approach show up in a frontier production model.

Canceling my Anthropic Max sub when this ships.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#138
post #56

Just two days ago, a preprint by Julia Stadlmann went up on arXiv [0] improving the prime gap from 246 to 240. Now OpenAI announces Astra has shown a gap of 186 [1]. That must really blow. [0] https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.31126 [1] https://cdn.openai.com/pdf/51126fac-1b68-4128-9666-c908bcc16...

Such a result should be considered worthless: the proof is 10MB of Lean. ( https://github.com/openai/PrimeGaps186 ). I can't think of a single mathematical proof being anywhere close to ten million characters. For all you know, 90% of the proof could be useless, 8% would be writing out Shakespeare, and 1% abusing another bug in Lean. Humanity gets zero value from that, aside from "some bot seems to think it's 186". U…

Yeah. Unless human can verify it, not sure if it is certain or useful.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#139
post #98

Hmm, 61 on ArtificialAnalysis, effectively matching GPT-5.6 and trailing the new Meta model. How is that possible along with the other metrics they shared? Insanely jagged intelligence?

Idk, this means the benchmark has bigger problems ... no way Astra will be worse than Opus 5 Only thing I would trust is the what X/Twitter crowds are saying about a model after 2-3 weeks of its launch. But before that I would already tried the model and have my own conclusion.

Also note that Opus 5 (High) has an index value of 62, vs Fable 5 (Max) has 61. So some strangeness going on with that index.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#140
post #34

I'm seeing reporting it gets 98.6% on ARC-AGI3[1] (previously like 30% with Fable) https://venturebeat.com/technology/welcome-to-the-agi-era-op...

This is with the caveat that OpenAI uses their own harness for this: > On ARC-AGI-3, GPT-6 Astra was run with our responses API harness , which changes two settings to better match real-world performance. The changes do not specifically target ARC-AGI-3.

Its 62 percent when using a neutral harness. https://arcprize.org/blog/astra
Post reply on HN