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

Further human + AI + proof assistant work on Knuth's "Claude Cycles" problem

twitter.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 208 posts

Re: Further human + AI + proof assistant work on Knuth's "Claude Cycles" problem

#61

Post by vatsachak »

slopinthebag wrote: post #59
vatsachak wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Something like building Linux is more akin to managing a McDonald's than it is to a 10 page technical proof in Algebraic Groups. Programming is more multimodal than math. Something like performance engineering might be free lunch though

Yeah, it's hard to compare management and programming but they're both multimodal in very different ways. But there's gonna be entire domains in which AI dominates much like stockfish, but stockfish isn't managing franchises and there is no reason to expect that anytime soon. I feel like something people miss when they talk about intelligence is that humans have incredible breadth. This is really what differentiates…

Exactly. It's what the execs are missing.

Also animals thrive in underspecified environments, while AIs like very specific environments. Math is the most specified field there is lol

Re: Further human + AI + proof assistant work on Knuth's "Claude Cycles" problem

#62

Post by Sopel »

hollerith wrote: post #57
vatsachak wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The weights must still have some understanding of the chess board. Though there is always the chance that it makes no sense to us

Does Stockfish have weights or use a neural net? I know older versions did not.

yes

Re: Further human + AI + proof assistant work on Knuth's "Claude Cycles" problem

#63

Post by Sopel »

slopinthebag wrote: post #45
vatsachak wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Tricks are nothing but patterns in the logical formulae we reduce. Ergo these are latent vectors in our brain. We use analogies like geometry in order to use Algebraic Geometry to solve problems in Number Theory. An AI trained on Lean Syntax trees might develop it's own weird versions of intuition that might actually properly contain ours. If this sounds far fetched, look at Chess. I wonder if anyone has dug into Sto…

Stockfish's power comes from mostly search, and the ML techniques it uses are mainly about better search, i.e. pruning branches more efficiently.

The ML techniques it uses are only about evaluation, but you were close

Re: Further human + AI + proof assistant work on Knuth's "Claude Cycles" problem

#64

Post by anematode »

slopinthebag wrote: post #54
vatsachak wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The weights must still have some understanding of the chess board. Though there is always the chance that it makes no sense to us

Even that is probably too much. It has no understanding of what "chess" is, or what a chess board is, or even what a game is. And yet it crushes every human with ease. It's pretty nuts haha.

Actually, the neural net itself is fairly imprecise. Search is required for it to achieve good play. Here's an example of me beating Stockfish 18 at depth 1: https://lichess.org/XmITiqmi

Re: Further human + AI + proof assistant work on Knuth's "Claude Cycles" problem

#65

Post by Hasslequest »

oytis wrote: post #9
brcmthrowaway wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Learn plumbing

There is no reason why market for plumbing will get much larger than it is now (which is not too large)

Surely AI has to take a shit eventually. What's all this racket about water usage?

Re: Further human + AI + proof assistant work on Knuth's "Claude Cycles" problem

#66

Post by madrox »

vatsachak wrote: post #36

I've always said this but AI will win a fields medal before being able to manage a McDonald's. Math seems difficult to us because it's like using a hammer (the brain) to twist in a screw (math). LLMs are discovering a lot of new math because they are great at low depth high breadth situations. I predict that in the future people will ditch LLMs in favor of AlphaGo style RL done on Lean syntax trees. These should be a…

> I've always said this but AI will win a fields medal before being able to manage a McDonald's.

I love this and have a corollary saying: the last job to be automated will be QA.

This wave of technology has triggered more discussion about the types of knowledge work that exist than any other, and I think we will be sharper for it.

Re: Further human + AI + proof assistant work on Knuth's "Claude Cycles" problem

#67

Post by emp17344 »

vatsachak wrote: post #49
slopinthebag wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stockfish's power comes from mostly search, and the ML techniques it uses are mainly about better search, i.e. pruning branches more efficiently.

The weights must still have some understanding of the chess board. Though there is always the chance that it makes no sense to us

Why must it involve understanding? I feel like you’re operating under the assumption that functionalism is the “correct” philosophical framework without considering alternative views.

Re: Further human + AI + proof assistant work on Knuth's "Claude Cycles" problem

#68

Post by dataviz1000 »

ale wrote: post #37
dataviz1000 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got Claude to self reference and update its own instructions to solve making a typed proxy API of any website. After a week, scores of iterations, it can reverse engineer any website. The first few days I had to be deeply involved with each iteration loop. Domain knowledge is helpful. Each time I saw a problem I would ask Claude to update its instructions so it doesn't happen again. Then less and less. Eventually i…

This type of slop comment is somehow worse than spam. >After a week, scores of iterations, it can reverse engineer any website Cool, let’s see the proof.

I posted a link but don't want to spam HN more than I have.

It is proof-of-concept. Seriously burns some tokens (~80k - ~200k) but doesn't require AI after to scrape and automate a website so if all the people at Browser Use, Browser Base, and every one pounding every website used it, I think, the net benefit would be in the billions. I would recommend using it in isolation. Nonetheless, it works very very well on my machine.

> This type of slop comment is somehow worse than spam.

Please don't be mean.

Re: Further human + AI + proof assistant work on Knuth's "Claude Cycles" problem

#69

Post by Sopel »

slopinthebag wrote: post #54
vatsachak wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The weights must still have some understanding of the chess board. Though there is always the chance that it makes no sense to us

Even that is probably too much. It has no understanding of what "chess" is, or what a chess board is, or even what a game is. And yet it crushes every human with ease. It's pretty nuts haha.

chess is just a simple mathematical construct so that's not surprising

Re: Further human + AI + proof assistant work on Knuth's "Claude Cycles" problem

#70

Post by emp17344 »

ale wrote: post #37
dataviz1000 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I got Claude to self reference and update its own instructions to solve making a typed proxy API of any website. After a week, scores of iterations, it can reverse engineer any website. The first few days I had to be deeply involved with each iteration loop. Domain knowledge is helpful. Each time I saw a problem I would ask Claude to update its instructions so it doesn't happen again. Then less and less. Eventually i…

This type of slop comment is somehow worse than spam. >After a week, scores of iterations, it can reverse engineer any website Cool, let’s see the proof.

There is no proof, just a self-congratulatory word salad with dubious authenticity.

It’s insane how insufferable this place is now.

Post reply on HN