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

531–540 of 737 posts

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#531

Post by SiempreViernes »

UltraSane wrote: post #497
stingraycharles wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They also said this is not part of GPT-5, and “will be released later”. It’s very, very likely a model specifically fine-tuned for this benchmark, where afterwards they’ll evaluate what actual real-world problems it’s good at (eg like “use o4-mini-high for coding”).

Humans who excel at IMO questions are also "fine tuned" on them in the sense that they practice them for hundreds of hours

Sure, but nobody is using their IMO score to prove they are superintelligent and pulling it off in wider groups.

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#532

Post by j_timberlake »

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…

"worth celebrating for"

The correlation between "companies make smarter AI" and "our lives get better" is still a rounding error.

Many people will say "don't worry, tech always makes our lives better eventually", they'll probably stop saying this once autonomous killer drone-swarms are a thing.

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#533

Post by logicchains »

bamboozled wrote: post #519
logicchains wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I think the main hesitancy is due to rampant anthropomorphism. These models cannot reason, they pattern match language tokens and generate emergent behaviour as a result This is rampant human chauvinism. There's absolutely no empirical basis for the statement that these models "cannot reason", it's just pseudoscientific woo thrown around by people who want to feel that humans are somehow special. By pretty much ever…

I’ve used these AI tools for multiple hours a day for months. Not seeing the reasoning party honestly. I see the heuristics part.

I guess your work doesn't involve any maths then, because then you'd see they're capable of solving maths problems that require a non-trivial amount of reasoning steps.

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#534

Post by j_timberlake »

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.

Holy shit, AIs just got a gold medal on the math olympiad and you guys are STILL spamming this shit in every thread. I don't even know how you can reach this level of inertia on a topic, did you short Nvidia stock or something?

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#536

Post by sealeck »

archon1410 wrote: post #477
tmule wrote: post #433

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Discussions about Indian politics or the Indian psyche—especially when laced with Indic supremacist undertones—are off-topic and an annoyance here. Please consider sharing these views in a forum focused on Indian affairs, where they’re more likely to find the traction they deserve.

It is not "supremacist" to believe that depriving hundreds of millions of people from higher education in their native language is deeply unjust. This reflection was prompted by a comment on why Indian languages are not represented in international competitions, which was prompted by a comment on the competition being available in many languages. Discussions online have a tendency to go off into tangents like this. I…

Much more efficient for us to all speak the same language. Trying to create fragmentation is inefficient.

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#537

Post by riku_iki »

jononor wrote: post #435
riku_iki wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> such announcements should wait at least a week after the closing ceremony it would raise more concerns that corps leaked questions/answers to training data and finetuned specialized models during this time.

This is solvable? They could post a hash of the solutions publicly, and reveal the contents of the solution after one week.

Yes, makes sense, thank you.

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#538

Post by logicchains »

cguess wrote: post #209
logicchains wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>I think the main hesitancy is due to rampant anthropomorphism. These models cannot reason, they pattern match language tokens and generate emergent behaviour as a result This is rampant human chauvinism. There's absolutely no empirical basis for the statement that these models "cannot reason", it's just pseudoscientific woo thrown around by people who want to feel that humans are somehow special. By pretty much ever…

> This is rampant human chauvinism What in the accelerationist hell?

There's nothing accelerationist about recognising that making unfalsifiable statements about LLMs lacking intelligence or reasoning ability serves zero purpose except stroking the speaker's ego. Such people are never willing to give a clear criteria for what would constitute proof of machine reasoning for them, which shows their belief isn't based on science or reason.

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#539

Post by sailingparrot »

ben_w wrote: post #521
sailingparrot wrote: post #495

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and not so much that fact that they used precise numbers in the their internal monologue as opposed to verbal buckets like "pretty likely", "very unlikely" I am obviously only talking from my personal anecdotal experience, but having been on a bunch of coffee chat in the last few months with people in the AI safety field in SF, and a lot of them being Lesswrong-ers, I experienced a lot of those discussions with ran…

> It could be just a personal mental weakness with numbers with me that is not general, but looking at my interlocutors emotional reactions to their own numerical predictions I do feel quite strongly that this is a general human trait. Your feeling is correct; anchoring is a thing, and good LessWrongers (I hope to be in that category) know this and keep track of where their prior and not just posterior probabilities…

Ah thanks for the link, yes this is precisely the bias I am feeling falling victim to if not making an effort to counter it.

Re: OpenAI claims gold-medal performance at IMO 2025

#540

Post by meindnoch »

sailingparrot wrote: post #256
z7 wrote: post #9

Some previous predictions: In 2021 Paul Christiano wrote he would update from 30% to "50% chance of hard takeoff" if we saw an IMO gold by 2025. He thought there was an 8% chance of this happening. Eliezer Yudkowsky said "at least 16%". Source: https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/sWLLdG6DWJEy3CH7n/imo-challe...

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…

>Off topic, but am I the only one getting triggered every time I see a rationalist

The rest of the sentence is not necessary. No, you're not the only one.

Post reply on HN