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

DeepMind and OpenAI win gold at ICPC

codeforces.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 255 posts

Re: DeepMind and OpenAI win gold at ICPC

#101

Post by HardCodedBias »

bazmattaz wrote: post #30
modeless wrote: post #14

More information on OpenAI's result (which seems better than DeepMind's) from the X thread: > our OpenAI reasoning system got a perfect score of 12/12 > For 11 of the 12 problems, the system’s first answer was correct. For the hardest problem, it succeeded on the 9th submission. Notably, the best human team achieved 11/12. > We had both GPT-5 and an experimental reasoning model generating solutions, and the experimen…

Ha so true. I was so tempted to copy and paste a problem into GPT5 and see what it would say

They likely had a prompt that gave considerable guidance.

Hopefully that prompt was the same for all questions (I think that is what they did for the IMO submission, or maybe it was Google that did that, not sure).

Re: DeepMind and OpenAI win gold at ICPC

#102

Post by theragra »

amluto wrote: post #59

I've contemplated this a bit, and I think I have a bit of an unconventional take: First, this is really impressive. Second, with that out of the way, these models are not playing the same game as the human contestants, in at least two major regards. First, and quite obviously, they have massive amounts of compute power, which is kind of like giving a human team a week instead of five hours. But the models that are co…

I think your analogy is lacking. Human brain is much more efficient, so it is not right to say "giving a human team a week instead of five hours". Most likely, the whole OpenAI compute cannot match one brain in terms of connections and relations and computation power.

Re: DeepMind and OpenAI win gold at ICPC

#103

Post by jaggs »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #99
jaggs wrote: post #13

I think it's becoming clear that these mega AI corps are juggling with their models at inference time to produce unrealistically good results. By that it seems that they're just cranking up the compute beyond reasonable levels in order to gain PR points against each other. The fact is most ordinary mortals never get access to a fraction of that kind of power, which explains the commonly reported issues with AI models…

The bleeding edge behind closed doors token burning monsters of 2023 are bad compared to the free LLMs we have now. I believe it was Sundar in an interview with Lex who said that the reason they haven't developed another Ultra model is because by the time it is ready to launch, the flash and pro versions will have already made it redundant.

But then why does every new model release work great for a few weeks, then suddenly performance plummets? It's mysterious?

Re: DeepMind and OpenAI win gold at ICPC

#104

Post by asboans »

amluto wrote: post #59

I've contemplated this a bit, and I think I have a bit of an unconventional take: First, this is really impressive. Second, with that out of the way, these models are not playing the same game as the human contestants, in at least two major regards. First, and quite obviously, they have massive amounts of compute power, which is kind of like giving a human team a week instead of five hours. But the models that are co…

Firstly, automobiles are really impressive.

Second, with that out the way, these cars are not playing the same game as horses… first, and quite obviously they have massive amounts of horsepower, which is kind of like giving a team of horses… many more horses. But also cars have an absolutely massive fuel capacity. Petrol is such an efficient store of chemical energy compared to hay and cars can store gallons of it.

I think if you give my horse the ability of 300 horses and fed it pure gasoline, I would be kind of embarrassed if it wasn’t able to win a horse race.

Re: DeepMind and OpenAI win gold at ICPC

#105

Post by twhyn2 »

apwell23 wrote: post #48
NitpickLawyer wrote: post #2

So this year SotA models have gotten gold at IMO, IoI, ICPC and beat 9/10 humans in that atcoder thing that tested optimisation problems. Yet the most reposted headlines and rethoric is "wall this", "stangation that", "model regression", "winter", "bubble", doom etc.

This comment makes me think. What did previous winners of these competition go on to do in their lives? Anything spectacular?

Indeed.

I personally view all this stuff as noise. Im more interested in seeing any contributions to the real economy. Not some competition stuff that is irrelevant to the welfare of people.

Re: DeepMind and OpenAI win gold at ICPC

#106

Post by twhyn2 »

birktj wrote: post #38
bgwalter wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Companies valued at $300 billion or more are not another individual and people are not "sharing" their works. The companies are stealing them. For the majority of interesting output people have paid for art, music, software, journalism. But you know that already and are justifying the industry that pays your bills.

Absolutely, I am sceptical of AI omin many ways, but primarily it is about the AI companies and my lack of trust in them. I find it unfortunate that all of the clearly brilliant engineers working at these companies are to preoccupied with always chasing newer and better model trying to reach the dream of AGI do not stop and ask themselves: who are they working for? What happens if they eventually manage to create a m…

"I find it unfortunate that all of the clearly brilliant engineers working at these companies are to preoccupied with always chasing newer and better model trying to reach the dream of AGI do not stop and ask themselves: who are they working for?"

Have you seen the people who do OpenAI demos? It becomes pretty apparent upon inspection, what is driving said people.

Re: DeepMind and OpenAI win gold at ICPC

#107

Post by HarHarVeryFunny »

dist-epoch wrote: post #83
HarHarVeryFunny wrote: post #57

ICPC = The International Collegiate Programming Contest. These are college level programmers, not elite competitive programmers. Apparently Gemini solved one problem (running on who knows what kind of cluster) by burning 30 min of "thinking" time on it, and at a cost that Google have declined to provide. According to one prior competition paricipant, writing in the comments section of this ArsClasica coverage, each y…

Let's bookmark this comment and check again next year, if the freely available models will be able to do it for a few dollars.

Sure, although my point wasn't intended to be about the cost (which would still be interesting to know), but rather that the win by Google seems more down to brute force than intelligence.

Re: DeepMind and OpenAI win gold at ICPC

#108

Post by twhyn2 »

jaggs wrote: post #13

I think it's becoming clear that these mega AI corps are juggling with their models at inference time to produce unrealistically good results. By that it seems that they're just cranking up the compute beyond reasonable levels in order to gain PR points against each other. The fact is most ordinary mortals never get access to a fraction of that kind of power, which explains the commonly reported issues with AI models…

"It's now turned into a whole marketing circus (maybe to justify these ludicrous billion-dollar valuations?)."

Yes theres an entire ecosystem being built up around language models that has to stay afloat for another 5 years at least, to hope for a significant breakthrough.

Re: DeepMind and OpenAI win gold at ICPC

#109

Post by Ylpertnodi »

sameermanek wrote: post #86

Whats the point? These models are still unreliable in every day work. And they're getting fat! For a moment, they were getting cheaper, but now they are only getting bigger and this is not going to be cheap in the future. The point is, what are we investing a trillion dollars in?

/> The point is, what are THEY investing a trillion dollars in?

Who cares? I won't be a customer until I see a return on my investment [in them].

Post reply on HN