Live data from Hacker News

Learning to Reason with LLMs

openai.com

91–100 of 1001 posts

Re: Learning to Reason with LLMs

#91
post #39

A lot of skepticism here, but these are astonishing results! People should realize we’re reaching the point where LLMs are surpassing humans in any task limited in scope enough to be a “benchmark”. And as anyone who’s spent time using Claude 3.5 Sonnet / GPT-4o can attest, these things really are useful and smart! (And, if these results hold up, O1 is much, much smarter.) This is a nerve-wracking time to be a knowled…

Even without AI, it's gotten ~10,000 times easier to write software than in the 1950s (eg. imagine trying to write PyTorch code by hand in IBM 650 assembly), but the demand for software engineering has only increased, because demand increases even faster than supply does. Jevons paradox: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jevons_paradox

The number of tech job postings has tanked - which loosely correlates with the rise of AI.

https://x.com/catalinmpit/status/1831768926746734984

Re: Learning to Reason with LLMs

#92
post #39

A lot of skepticism here, but these are astonishing results! People should realize we’re reaching the point where LLMs are surpassing humans in any task limited in scope enough to be a “benchmark”. And as anyone who’s spent time using Claude 3.5 Sonnet / GPT-4o can attest, these things really are useful and smart! (And, if these results hold up, O1 is much, much smarter.) This is a nerve-wracking time to be a knowled…

Is it? They talk about 10k attempts to reach gold medal status in the mathematics olympiad, but zero shot performance doesn't even place it in the upper 50th percentile. Maybe I'm confused but 10k attempts on the same problem set would make anyone an expert in that topic? It's also weird that zero shot performance is so bad, but over a lot of attempts it seems to get correct answers? Or is it learning from previous a…

That's not what "zero shot" means.

Re: Learning to Reason with LLMs

#93
post #8

The model performance is driven by chain of thought, but they will not be providing chain of thought responses to the user for various reasons including competitive advantage. After the release of GPT4 it became very common to fine-tune non-OpenAI models on GPT4 output. I’d say OpenAI is rightly concerned that fine-tuning on chain of thought responses from this model would allow for quicker reproduction of their resu…

The open source/weights models so far have proved that openAI doesn't have some special magic sauce. I m confident we ll soon have a model from Meta or others that s close to this level of reasoning. [Also consider that some of their top researchers have departed]

On a cursory look, it looks like the chain of thought is a long series of chains of thought balanced on each step, with a small backtracking added whenever a negative result occurs, sort of like solving a maze.

Re: Learning to Reason with LLMs

#95
post #39

A lot of skepticism here, but these are astonishing results! People should realize we’re reaching the point where LLMs are surpassing humans in any task limited in scope enough to be a “benchmark”. And as anyone who’s spent time using Claude 3.5 Sonnet / GPT-4o can attest, these things really are useful and smart! (And, if these results hold up, O1 is much, much smarter.) This is a nerve-wracking time to be a knowled…

Is it? They talk about 10k attempts to reach gold medal status in the mathematics olympiad, but zero shot performance doesn't even place it in the upper 50th percentile. Maybe I'm confused but 10k attempts on the same problem set would make anyone an expert in that topic? It's also weird that zero shot performance is so bad, but over a lot of attempts it seems to get correct answers? Or is it learning from previous a…

It’s undeniably less impressive than a human on the same task, but who cares at the end of the day? It can do 10,000 attempts in the time a person can do 1. Obviously improving that ratio will help for any number of reasons, but if you have a computer that can do a task in 5 minutes that will take a human 3 hours, it doesn’t necessarily matter very much how you got there.

Re: Learning to Reason with LLMs

#99

Kinda disappointed that they're hiding the thought process. Hopefully the open source community will figure out how to effectively match and replicate what OpenAI is doing. I wonder how far we are from having a model that can correctly solve a word soup search problem directly from just a prompt and input image. It seems like the crossword example is close. For a word search it would require turning the image into an…

> Hopefully the open source community will figure out how to effectively match and replicate what OpenAI is doing. No need for that, there is a Reflection 70B model that does the exact same thing - with chains of thought being separated from the "final answer" via custom 'tag' tokens.

Wasn't this the model that was proven to have been faking their benchmarks recently? Or am I thinking of a different model?

Re: Learning to Reason with LLMs

#100
post #76
post #58

Do people see the new models in the web interface? Mine still shows the old models (I'm a paid subscriber).

> "o1 models are currently in beta - The o1 models are currently in beta with limited features. Access is limited to developers in tier 5 (check your usage tier here), with low rate limits (20 RPM). We are working on adding more features, increasing rate limits, and expanding access to more developers in the coming weeks!" https://platform.openai.com/docs/guides/rate-limits/usage-ti...

I'm talking about web interface, not API. Should be available now, since they said "immediate release".
Post reply on HN