Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

GPT-6 Astra

openai.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#341

Post by bbor »

intrasight wrote: post #279
intenex wrote: post #269

The ARC-AGI-3 scorecard is extremely misleading given that it clearly states itself that "with [the responses API] harness, we estimate Sol would score in the ballpark of ~30%." but it shows a score of 7.8% for GPT-5.6 Sol presumably since if they updated the percentage for GPT-5.6 Sol to the score it would receive with the responses API harness they used for GPT-6 Astra they'd have to do the same for the percentage…

It has to pass the Turing test

I'm barely holding it together here so you don't get the full spiel, but a quick skim of Turing's paper clarifies that it was never about a binary test. https://courses.cs.umbc.edu/471/papers/turing.pdf Specifically sections 1 & 6 dispell the common myths, and the conclusion is also quite powerful.

Smart guy, that Turing. I wish he were still around... Linus but 114 years old and with 8 of that as the chair of a federated EU, kept alive by his own positive impact on dissolving the cold war into even more of a scientific boom. Would crazy helpful as we try to navigate the interesting times within which we have been damned.

A comforting thought, almost?

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#345

Post by goochphd »

intenex wrote: post #269

The ARC-AGI-3 scorecard is extremely misleading given that it clearly states itself that "with [the responses API] harness, we estimate Sol would score in the ballpark of ~30%." but it shows a score of 7.8% for GPT-5.6 Sol presumably since if they updated the percentage for GPT-5.6 Sol to the score it would receive with the responses API harness they used for GPT-6 Astra they'd have to do the same for the percentage…

Small comment regarding the ARC-AGI-3 scorecard: the ARC folks published a blog post as well [1], reporting that without the custom harness, Astra (max) achieved 62.7%, which is still a huge jump from Opus 5, albeit not at the 99.9% that OpenAI self-reports with their harness.

[1] https://arcprize.org/blog/astra

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#346

Post by Chinjut »

What is going to become of life for those of us who do not work at AI labs and are unlikely to be hired by AI labs, despite all the years we put into learning coding, math, etc, as we were told to do? Those of us who made the mistake of studying anything other than machine learning. How will we make a living? (We don't live in a world that seems likely to distribute gains widely instead of largely to the handful of already mega-rich.)

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#347

Post by XCSme »

GodelNumbering wrote: post #294

The most interesting part, even more than ARC 3 score, to me is that this is the first model I recall seeing that scores lower on Max than High reasoning effort on some coding benchmarks: Terminal-Bench 4.0: High (57.9%), Max (56.7%) DeepSWE: High (73.3%), Max (71.5%) It _loses_ 1-2% performance going to High from Max

That's quite common with many models, after "High" reasoning, over-thinking starts occurring and the model skips over the right solution by convincing itself otherwise.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#348

Post by phainopepla2 »

Pikamander2 wrote: post #336
jdprgm wrote: post #314

Is anyone else just exhausted by the pace of all this. The models change constantly and relentlessly and so does the pricing, basically weekly at this point between all the labs. It feels nearly impossible to have any rigorous approach when choosing a particular model and price point for a task and more like blindly picking one. The time period needed to actually get familiar with various models to a degree you can i…

That's how cutting edge tech has always worked. Imagine buying a shiny new PC in the 90s only to see it become practically obsolete within a year.

That's not the experience of owning a PC I remember from the 90s at all.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#349

Post by petilon »

petilon wrote: post #144

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,…

Sam Altman himself has said it is not AGI unless it can discover novel physics.

https://x.com/burny_tech/status/1725233117055553938

In the tweet Sam Altman is quoted as saying: "If (for example) super intelligence can't discover novel physics I don't think it's a superintelligence. And teaching it to clone the behavior of humans and human text - I don't think that's going to get there. And so there's this question which has been debated in the field for a long time: what do we have to do in addition to a language model to make a system that can go discover new physics?"

I think this is a reasonable criteria for declaring AGI. So can GPT-6 do it? OpenAI says it has helped solve long-standing open problems in mathematics. No word on novel physics.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#350

Post by Yajirobe »

Planktonne wrote: post #278

I'm sure it's going to do great on all sorts of benchmarks, but the video--the actual marketing video that if anything is incentivised to overstate things--is full of careful cuts just before it would do anything that still wouldn't actually be that impressive. It's AGI, and it's going to upload photos, or change a background slide colour. Even the people hyping it up, who believe that it's really artificial intellig…

The house of cards is starting to fall apart
Post reply on HN