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

691–700 of 1001 posts

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#691

Post by nullbio »

jumploops wrote: post #485

I think the thing I'm most excited about is the increase in _user prompting_. If I give a poorly constrained/ambiguous prompt, I don't want the model one-shotting assumptions left and right. The demos of Fable/GPT-6 are impressive, but "real AGI" should act more like a collaborator than either a peon or overachiever. It's a tough balance to get right, and although this has been possible to achieve with additional pro…

This is spot on. A collaborator is exactly what real AGI is. It will figure out the perfect questions to ask, in the perfect order, by intelligently assessing the entire solution and problem space upfront, so when you leave it to go off on its own it isn't making stupid decisions for you.

They really need to make this work in Codex. Claude Code has had a multi-select refinement tool since forever.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#692

Post by dannyw »

tintor wrote: post #651

- OpenAI claims Astra beats all benchmarks (compared to Fable and Opus, except "Humanity's Last Exam (w/ tools)"): https://openai.com/index/gpt-6-astra/ - Artificial Analysis scores Astra (max effort) as 61 points on intelligence, behind Opus 5. https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/gpt-6-astra Who is wrong here? Some benchmark results in Astra page for Fable and Opus are blank (-). What is Artificial Analysis intelli…

I really, really don't find the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index credible anymore. It's some weighted score of benchmarks, and benchmarks increasingly don't reflect how good a model is.

That should be obvious if you compare Gemini 3.8 Flash (which is an _excellent_ model especially for its price and TPS!! but 10min of prompting in any harness) will tell you it's nowhere near close to Sol/Astra.

But AA scores Gemini 3.8 Flash at 59, and Astra at 61.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#693

Post by sashank_1509 »

Chinjut wrote: post #319

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 a…

You can cash your UBI check that Sam Promised and do poetry daily or something , welcome to our glorious future (/s).

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#694

Post by trentearl »

echoangle wrote: post #538
manlymuppet wrote: post #399

I have nothing to say about the actual model, but unrelated--why do so many of these demos include people buying things autonomously? Even if I did trust an AI to get everything right, it's not like the AI can read my mind. If I was ordering food normally and without AI, I would want more control over the process--looking over the options, prices, thinking about what I really want. People don't know what they really…

That’s exactly the problem I have with all this agent ideas too. Imagine you had a human concierge that is just waiting for your instructions and is as smart or a bit smarter than you. Would you just tell them “plan this holiday for me” or “order this food”? I don’t even trust my friends to get this right, why would I give this to someone else?

Claude code planned my recent trip to China. I'm a very experienced traveller but don't enjoy planning. It was a great trip.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#695

Post by hdjrudni »

intenex wrote: post #248

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…

I'm still not convinced we've passed the Turing Test.

Make a slightly evil version of GPT 6 and see if it can successfully catfish someone. How long before they realize something's up, that they aren't actually talking to a human?

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#696

Post by nullbio »

isoprophlex wrote: post #66

> 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 model is able to remain undetected when strategically underperforming in evaluations (sandbagging) and can sometimes evade our internal monitors when asked to perform certa…

They can monitor latent space as well, it just costs extra compute. The J-Space work is example of that. It'll make open-weight models harder to distill though, so we may see slower progress there now.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#697

Post by fooblaster »

openaiscooked wrote: post #687
dalemhurley wrote: post #284

OpenAI is killing it now that they are more focused. Killing projects like Sora et al have seen it go from irrelevant to level footing with Anthropic. Sol is so much better than Fable 5. Then we get Astra (yet to use it) few days after Fable 5.1 (which is very impressive). Codex is slightly better than Claude Code. Good on Sam Altman getting back to basics and turning OpenAI around.

Killing Sora was one of the worst mistakes they ever made

please tell us why

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#698

Post by intenex »

Yizahi wrote: post #500
intenex wrote: post #248

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…

> I'd be curious to hear takes on what would make you think Astra is yet to be AGI, and what would still need to be achieved for this to effectively be AGI from this point forward. Can Astra, or any other model explain how exactly it reached this or that output result? Start with a simple query of asking to add 55+66 for example. (no LLM program can do that) Can Astra, or any other model refuse to answer or go on "th…

I'm confused what you mean by the query of adding 55 + 66. I asked 5.6 Sol on Medium (but pretty sure any model would work at any level) this query:

"Can you add 55 to 66 and explain how you reached that output result"

And received this answer:

"55 + 66 = 121.

Add the tens: 50 + 60 = 110. Add the ones: 5 + 6 = 11. Combine them: 110 + 11 = 121."

Do you mean something else? Do humans do something better than this?

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#699

Post by Forgeties79 »

mvkel wrote: post #263
intenex wrote: post #248

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…

Take it from the mouth of the creator of ARC-AGI: When we released ARC 3, I got asked, "when do you think a frontier model will saturate it?", and I answered "in about a year, though it depends on how much it gets explicitly targeted" That was 6 months ago, so the progress that Astra represents happened about 2x faster than I anticipated. I think the speed of progress will surprise a lot of people, and what the new m…

We are nowhere near AGI. They all talk the same, they can’t help but try to please and affirm us, and if you engage them for too long they become incoherent. They are facsimile machines. They are xeroxing language - but not even, because we can’t even duplicate our results. Too many people mistake the black box quality for magic.

Super useful, incredible tools, but not AGI. Try and roleplay a dialogue with one, make it whatever character and scenario, and see if it can sustain a coherent conversation for more than 30min with you AIM style (aol instant messenger, if that isn’t clear). Expert mode: never correct or adjust it mid conversation.

I’m not even talking about repetition and predictability. It’s nothing like talking to a person. And in a short amount of time it literally can’t form a coherent sentence.

Re: GPT-6 Astra

#700

Post by mlmonkey »

manlymuppet wrote: post #399

I have nothing to say about the actual model, but unrelated--why do so many of these demos include people buying things autonomously? Even if I did trust an AI to get everything right, it's not like the AI can read my mind. If I was ordering food normally and without AI, I would want more control over the process--looking over the options, prices, thinking about what I really want. People don't know what they really…

I often feel like the use cases, demos, etc. that these Silicon Valley employees put out are based around their needs and how they operate.

"Oh hey! Here's a demo of an AI planning out a 1-week trip to Paris!" No one in Middle America would just hand their credit card to an AI and let it come up with such a trip!

I wish SV companies took more of the middle-class (and lower-middle-class) into consideration when coming up with such demos.

(Note: I live in SF)

Post reply on HN