Imagine having your retirement fund manager investing in a couple million more based on the original tweet. Very cool.
OpenAI researcher announced GPT-5 math breakthrough that never happened
221–230 of 258 posts
Re: OpenAI researcher announced GPT-5 math breakthrough that never happened
#222This honestly doesn’t surprise me. We have reached a point where it’s becoming clearer and clearer that AGI is nowhere to be seen, whereas advances in LLM ability to ‘reason’ have slowed down to (almost?) a halt.
Hence the pivot into ads, shop-in-chat and umm.. adult content.
[deleted]
Re: OpenAI researcher announced GPT-5 math breakthrough that never happened
#223To be fair to the OpenAI team, if read in context the situation is at worst ambiguous. The deleted tweet that the article is about said "GPT-5 just found solutions to 10 (!) previously unsolved Erdös problems, and made progress on 11 others. These have all been open for decades." If it had been posted stand-alone then I would certainly agree that it was misleading, but it was not. It was a quote-tweet of this: https:…
> "GPT-5 is really good at literature search, it 'solved' an apparently-open problem by finding an existing solution" Survivor bias. I can assure you that GPT-5 fucks up even relatively easy searches. I need to have a very good idea how the results looks like and the ability to test it to be able to use any result from GPT-5. If I throw the dice 1000 times and post about it each time that I got a double six. Am I the…
I'm not really sure what you mean. Literature search is about casting a wide net to make a reading list that is relevant to your research.
It is pretty hard to fuck that up, since you aren't expected to find everything anyway. The idea of "testing" and "using any result from GPT" is just, like, reading the papers and seeing if they are tangentially related.
If I may speak to my own experience, literature search has been the most productive application I've personally used, more than coding, and I've found many interesting papers and research directions with it.
Re: OpenAI researcher announced GPT-5 math breakthrough that never happened
#224I make mistakes all the time. This seems like a genuine mistake, not malice. Imagine if you were talking about your own work online, you make an honest mistake, then the whole industry roasts you for it. I’m so tired of hearing everyone take stabs at people at OpenAI just because they don’t personally like sama or something.
Mistakes are human yes we all do make them all time.
However when representing an reputable organization, people are expected to be cautious or otherwise required to have their comments reviewed and most organizations would enforce this to protect their brand or reputation.
As Carl Sagan said it best, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. This was a pretty extraordinary claim and multiple senior staff at the org endorsed the comment without even a cursory check first. I would think serious observers are more concerned by the process and controls in OpenAI or lack thereof here, rather than a specific single mistake.
Like them or hate them, OpenAI is the leader in the industry, and everyone lookup up to them and their employees in a public forum for credible information so will hold them to higher standard than a lesser known lab.
The burden of checking for quality comes with having a reputable brand . The burden is being monetized / compensated with the valuation or size of fund raise a org is able to command.
Re: OpenAI researcher announced GPT-5 math breakthrough that never happened
#225Earlier quoted context omitted.
You couldn’t just photoshop that before ai came out? What if you get a model that is 99% similar to your “target” - what we do with that?
Sure, someone skilled could spend an hour or so photoshoping someone nude. But any teenager can do that to a classmate in 30 seconds with ai
So just because the poor can do what the rich could do before what it means?
Before only rich can afford to pay a pro to do photoshop. Now any poor person can get.
So why when rich can is fine and when everyone can is a problem?
Re: OpenAI researcher announced GPT-5 math breakthrough that never happened
#226The sad truth about this incident is that it reveals that OpenAI does not have a serious effort to actually work on unsolved math problems.
That’s a non sequitur. They’re a fairly large organization, I’d be amazed if they don’t have multiple research sub-teams pursuing all sorts of different directions.
It is not about whether some team somewhere is dabbling in math, it’s about institutional emphasis. When serious math work exists, it tends to be checked before being broadcast. The fact that this didn’t happen suggests that genuine mathematical rigor isn’t a central focus.
Re: OpenAI researcher announced GPT-5 math breakthrough that never happened
#227> GPT-5 is proving useful as a literature review assistant No, it does not. It only produces a highly convincing counterfeit. I am honestly happy for people who are satisfied with its output: life is way easier for them than for me. Obviously, the machine discriminates me personally. When I spend hours in the library looking for some engineering-related math made in the 70s-80s, as a last resort measure, I can try to…
LLM-powered deep research tools are very useful at finding whether someone has already published on a research question. You could spend days performing keyword searches and traversing citation graphs but still miss relevant pockets of the literature. Semantic search is a genuine improvement here.
As to not trusting the generated text, you’re totally right. That’s why I use it as a search tool but mostly ignore the content of what the LLM has to say and go to the source.
Re: OpenAI researcher announced GPT-5 math breakthrough that never happened
#228“Mathematician Thomas Bloom, who runs erdosproblems.com, pushed back right away. He called the statements "a dramatic misinterpretation," clarifying that "open" on his site just means he personally doesn't know the solution - not that the problem is actually unsolved.” What mathematician uses this as the definition for “open”? I don’t go around saying that most problems in this textbook are open questions, just becau…
He's pointing out that erdosproblems.com is an eventually consistent list of solved problems, so there may be a lag between when a problem is solved and when it's marked as such on his site.
Re: OpenAI researcher announced GPT-5 math breakthrough that never happened
#229This honestly doesn’t surprise me. We have reached a point where it’s becoming clearer and clearer that AGI is nowhere to be seen, whereas advances in LLM ability to ‘reason’ have slowed down to (almost?) a halt.
In my book, chat-based AGI has been reached years ago, when I couldn't reliably distinguish computer from human. Solving problems that humanity couldn't solve is super-AGI or something like that. It's not there indeed.
What do you mean reliably distinguish a computer from a human? I haven't been surprised one time yet. I always find out eventually when I'm talking to an AI. It's easy usually, they get into loops, forget about conversation context, don't make connections between obvious things and do make connections between less obvious things. Etc.
Of course they can sound very human like, but you know you shouldn't be that naive these days.
Also you should of course not judge based on a few words.
Re: OpenAI researcher announced GPT-5 math breakthrough that never happened
#230The sad truth about this incident is that it reveals that OpenAI does not have a serious effort to actually work on unsolved math problems.
they're hiring people for that right now if you look at their LinkedIn posts