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

421–430 of 737 posts

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#421

Post by atleastoptimal »

Oras wrote: post #418
atleastoptimal wrote: post #412

>AI model performs astounding feat everyone claimed was impossible or won’t be achieved for a while >Commenters on HN claim it must not be that hard, or OpenAI is lying, or cheated. Anything but admit that it is impressive Every time on this site lol. A lot of people here have an emotional aversion to accepting AI progress. They’re deep in the bargaining/anger/denial phase.

Get ready to downvoted, the wave of single minded is coming

There is a diversity of opinions on this site. I do hope that soon more of the intelligent commenters who have spent a while denying AI progress will realize what’s actually happening and contribute their brainpower to a meaningful cause in the lead up to AI-human parity. If we want a good future in a world where AI is smarter than humans, we need to do alignment work soon.

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#422

Post by tomrod »

atleastoptimal wrote: post #412

>AI model performs astounding feat everyone claimed was impossible or won’t be achieved for a while >Commenters on HN claim it must not be that hard, or OpenAI is lying, or cheated. Anything but admit that it is impressive Every time on this site lol. A lot of people here have an emotional aversion to accepting AI progress. They’re deep in the bargaining/anger/denial phase.

Sort of a naive response, considering many of the folks calling out the issues have significant experience building with LLMs or building LLMs.

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#423

Post by sailingparrot »

c1ccccc1 wrote: post #392
sailingparrot wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Off topic, but am I the only one getting triggered every time I see a rationalist quantify their prediction of the future with single digit accuracy? It's like their magic way of trying to get everyone to forget that they reached their conclusion in completely hand-wavy way, just like every other human being. But instead of saying "low confidence" or "high confidence" like the rest of us normies, they will tell you t…

Would you also get triggered if you saw people make a bet at, say, $24 : $87 odds? Would you shout: "No! That's too precise, you should bet $20 : $90!"? For that matter, should all prices in the stock market be multiples of $1, (since, after all, fluctuations of greater than $1 are very common)? If the variance (uncertainty) in a number is large, correct thing to do is to just also report the variance, not to round t…

> Would you also get triggered if you saw people make a bet at, say, $24 : $87 odds? Would you shout: "No! That's too precise, you should bet $20 : $90!"? For that matter, should all prices in the stock market be multiples of $1, (since, after all, fluctuations of greater than $1 are very common)?

No.

I responded to the same point here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44618142

> correct thing to do is to just also report the variance

And do we also pull this one out of thin air?

Using precise number to convey extremely unprecise and ungrounded opinions is imho wrong and to me unsettling. I'm pulling this purely out of my ass, and maybe I am making too much out of it, but I feel this is in part what is causing the many cases of very weird, and borderline associal/dangerous behaviours of some associated with the rationalists movement. When you try to precisely quantify what cannot be, and start trusting those numbers too much, you can easily be led to trust your conclusions way too much. I am 56% confident this is a real effect.

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#424

Post by tomrod »

bigyabai wrote: post #390
oceanplexian wrote: post #384

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know it’s a meme but there actually are fully self driving cars, they make thousands of trips every day in a couple US cities.

> in a couple US cities FWIW, when you get this reductive with your criterion there were technically self-driving cars in 2008 too.

We can go further. Automated trains have cars. Streetcars are automatable since the track is fixed.

And both of these reduce traffic

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#425

Post by dang »

archon1410 wrote: post #381

And of course it's available even in Icelandic, spoken by ~300k people, but not a single Indian language, spoken by hundreds of millions. भारत दुर्दशा न देखी जाई...

Please don't take HN threads into nationalistic flamewar. It leads nowhere interesting or good.

We detached this subthread from https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44615783.

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#426

Post by OldfieldFund »

tomrod wrote: post #422
atleastoptimal wrote: post #412

>AI model performs astounding feat everyone claimed was impossible or won’t be achieved for a while >Commenters on HN claim it must not be that hard, or OpenAI is lying, or cheated. Anything but admit that it is impressive Every time on this site lol. A lot of people here have an emotional aversion to accepting AI progress. They’re deep in the bargaining/anger/denial phase.

Sort of a naive response, considering many of the folks calling out the issues have significant experience building with LLMs or building LLMs.

I'm building with LLMs, and they're solving problems that weren't possible to solve before due to how many resources they would consume. Resources, as in human-hours.

Finance, chemistry, biology, medicine.

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#427

Post by jononor »

asadotzler wrote: post #339
ksec wrote: post #87

I am neither an optimist nor a pessimist for AI. I would likely be called both by the opposite parties. But the fact that AI / LLM is still rapidly improving is impressive in itself and worth celebrating for. Is it perfect, AGI, ASI? No. Is it useless? Absolutely not. I am just happy the prize is so big for AI that there are enough money involve to push for all the hardware advancement. Foundry, Packaging, Interconne…

But unlike the trillion dollars invested in the broadband internet build out between 1998 and 2008, when this 10 year trillion dollar bubble pops, we won't be left with an enduring and useful piece of infrastructure adding a trillion dollars to the global economy annually.

It would leave a lots of general purpose GPU-based compute. That is useful and enduring infrastructure? These things are used for many scientific and engineering problems - including medicine, climate modeling, material science, neuroscience, etc

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#428

Post by atleastoptimal »

tomrod wrote: post #422
atleastoptimal wrote: post #412

>AI model performs astounding feat everyone claimed was impossible or won’t be achieved for a while >Commenters on HN claim it must not be that hard, or OpenAI is lying, or cheated. Anything but admit that it is impressive Every time on this site lol. A lot of people here have an emotional aversion to accepting AI progress. They’re deep in the bargaining/anger/denial phase.

Sort of a naive response, considering many of the folks calling out the issues have significant experience building with LLMs or building LLMs.

Denying the rapid improvement in AI is the only naivety that really matters in the long run at this point. I haven’t seen much substantive criticism of this achievement that boils down to anything more than “well it’s a secret model so they must not be telling us something”

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#429

Post by nick238 »

atleastoptimal wrote: post #412

>AI model performs astounding feat everyone claimed was impossible or won’t be achieved for a while >Commenters on HN claim it must not be that hard, or OpenAI is lying, or cheated. Anything but admit that it is impressive Every time on this site lol. A lot of people here have an emotional aversion to accepting AI progress. They’re deep in the bargaining/anger/denial phase.

I guess my major question would be: does the training data include anything from 2025 which may have included information about the IMO 2025?

Given that AI companies are constantly trying to slurp up any and all data online, if the model was derived from existing work, it's maybe less impressive than at first glance. If present-day model does well at IMO 2026, that would be nice.

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#430

Post by wouldbecouldbe »

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…

Yeah that’s the dream, but same as with the bar exams, they are fine tuning the models for specific tests. Which probably the model even has been trained on previous version of those tests
Post reply on HN