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

OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 737 posts

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#341

Post by keeda »

rafaelero wrote: post #65
exegeist wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Impressive prediction, especially pre-ChatGPT. Compare to Gary Marcus 3 months ago: https://garymarcus.substack.com/p/reports-of-llms-mastering-... We may certainly hope Eliezer's other predictions don't prove so well-calibrated.

Gary Marcus is so systematically and overconfidently wrong that I wonder why we keep talking about this clown.

People like him and Zitron do serve a useful purpose in balancing the hype from the other side, which, while justified to a great extent, is often a bit too overwhelming.

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#343

Post by Philpax »

keeda wrote: post #341
rafaelero wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Gary Marcus is so systematically and overconfidently wrong that I wonder why we keep talking about this clown.

People like him and Zitron do serve a useful purpose in balancing the hype from the other side, which, while justified to a great extent, is often a bit too overwhelming.

Being wrong in the other direction doesn't mean you've found a great balance, it just means you've found a new way to be wrong.

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#345

Post by wds »

modeless wrote: post #117

Noam Brown: > this isn’t an IMO-specific model. It’s a reasoning LLM that incorporates new experimental general-purpose techniques. > it’s also more efficient [than o1 or o3] with its thinking. And there’s a lot of room to push the test-time compute and efficiency further. > As fast as recent AI progress has been, I fully expect the trend to continue. Importantly, I think we’re close to AI substantially contributing…

> I think we’re close to AI substantially contributing to scientific discovery.

The new "Full Self-Driving next year"?

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#346

Post by emp17344 »

falcor84 wrote: post #276
YeGoblynQueenne wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>> Why is that less exciting? A machine competing in an unconstrained natural language difficult math contest and coming out on top by any means is breath taking science fiction a few years ago - now it’s not exciting? Half the internet is convinced that LLMs are a big data cheating machine and if they're right then, yes, boldly cheating where nobody has cheated before is not that exciting.

I don't get it, how do you "big data cheat" an AI into solving previously unencountered problems? Wouldn't that just be engineering?

I mean, solutions for the 2025 IMO problems are already available on the internet. How can we be sure these are “unencountered” problems?

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#347

Post by sorokod »

Philpax wrote: post #342
sorokod wrote: post #338

Not even bronze. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44615695

This is a new model. Those tests were with what's currently publicly available.

Ah true.

Although it's the benchmark that is publicly available. The model is not.

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#348

Post by shiandow »

skepticATX wrote: post #280

Has anyone independently reviewed these solutions? My proving skills are extremely rusty so I can’t look at these and validate them. They certainly are not traditional proofs though.

I read through P1, and it seemed to be correct. Though you could explain the central idea of the proof into about 3 sentences and a few drawings.

It reads like someone who found the correct answer but seemingly had no understanding of what they did and just handed in the draft paper.

Which seems odd, shouldn't an LLM be better at prose?

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#349

Post by rafaelero »

mikert89 wrote: post #133

The cynicism/denial on HN about AI is exhausting. Half the comments are some weird form of explaining away the ever increasing performance of these models I've been reading this website for probably 15 years, its never been this bad. many threads are completely unreadable, all the actual educated takes are on X, its almost like there was a talent drain

Indeed it's a very unsophisticated and obnoxious audience around here. They are so conservative and unadventurous that anything possibly transformative is labeled as hype. I feel bad for them.

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#350

Post by ktallett »

zug_zug wrote: post #63
ktallett wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I feel like I've noticed you you making the same comment 12 places in this thread -- incorrectly misrepresenting the difficulty of this tournament and ultimately it comes across as a bitter ex. Here's an example problem 5: Let a1,a2,…,an be distinct positive integers and let M=max⁡1≤i Find the maximum number of pairs (i,j) with 1≤i<j≤n for which (ai +aj )(aj −ai )=M.

Hence proofs as I've stated.
Post reply on HN