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

DeepMind and OpenAI win gold at ICPC

codeforces.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 255 posts

Re: DeepMind and OpenAI win gold at ICPC

#91

Post by _diyar »

amluto wrote: post #59

I've contemplated this a bit, and I think I have a bit of an unconventional take: First, this is really impressive. Second, with that out of the way, these models are not playing the same game as the human contestants, in at least two major regards. First, and quite obviously, they have massive amounts of compute power, which is kind of like giving a human team a week instead of five hours. But the models that are co…

I think your assessment is spot on. But I also think there's a bigger picture that's getting lost in the sauce, not just in your comment but in the general discourse around AI progress:

- We're currently unlocking capabilities to solve many tasks which could previously only be solved by the top-1% of the experts in the field.

- Almost all of that progress is coming from large scale deep learning. Turns out transformers with autoregression + RL are mighty generalists (tho yet far from AGI).

Once it becomes cheap enough so the average joe can tinker with models of this scale, every engineering field can apply it to their niche interest. And ultimately nobody cares if you're playing by the same rules as humans outside of these competitions, they only care that you make them wealthy, healthy and comfy.

Re: DeepMind and OpenAI win gold at ICPC

#92

Post by Workaccount2 »

smokel wrote: post #53

The best thing of the ICPC is the first C, which stands for "collegiate". It means that you get to solve a set of problems with three persons, but with only one computer. This means that you have to be smart about who is going to spend time coding, thinking, or debugging. The time pressure is intense, and it really is a team sport. It's also extra fun if one of the team members prefers a Dvorak keyboard layout and vi…

Claude, ChatGPT, and Gemini on a team.

I'm not sure how it would play out, but at least when you let them talk to each other they tend to get very technical very fast.

Re: DeepMind and OpenAI win gold at ICPC

#93

Post by Workaccount2 »

minimaxir wrote: post #11
simianwords wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you using the thinking model or the non thinking model? Maybe you can share your chat.

The point of the GPT-5 model is that it is supposed to route between thinking/nonthinking smartly. Leveraging prompt hacks such as instructing it to "think carefully" to force routing to the thinking model go against OpenAI's claims.

Just select GPT5-thinking if you need anything done with competence. The regular gpt5 is nothing impressive and geared more towards regular daily life chatting.

Re: DeepMind and OpenAI win gold at ICPC

#94

Post by Workaccount2 »

KallDrexx wrote: post #16
NitpickLawyer wrote: post #2

So this year SotA models have gotten gold at IMO, IoI, ICPC and beat 9/10 humans in that atcoder thing that tested optimisation problems. Yet the most reposted headlines and rethoric is "wall this", "stangation that", "model regression", "winter", "bubble", doom etc.

It's important to look closely at the details of how these models actually do these things. If you look at the details of how Google got gold at IMO, you'll see that AlphaGeometry only relies on LLMs for a very specific part of the whole system, and the LLM wasn't the core problem solving system in play. Most of AlphaGeometry is standard algorithms at play solving geometry problems using known constraints. When the a…

>This achievement is a significant advance over last year’s breakthrough result. At IMO 2024, AlphaGeometry and AlphaProof required experts to first translate problems from natural language into domain-specific languages, such as Lean, and vice-versa for the proofs. It also took two to three days of computation. This year, our advanced Gemini model operated end-to-end in natural language, producing rigorous mathematical proofs directly from the official problem descriptions – all within the 4.5-hour competition time limit.

[1]https://deepmind.google/discover/blog/advanced-version-of-ge...

Re: DeepMind and OpenAI win gold at ICPC

#95

Post by blibble »

tgma wrote: post #65
blibble wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the AI isn't malevolent (... yet) but the companies operating it certainly are they have no concept of consent they take anything and everything, regardless of copyright or license, with no compensation to the authors and then use it to directly compete with those they ripped off not to mention shoving their poor quality generated slop everywhere they can possibly manage, regardless of ethics, consent or potential co…

> but the companies operating it certainly are Which ones in particular? Is your belief all that are companies are inherently malevolent? If not why don't you start one that is not? What's stopping you?

I don't think I need to give a list

> What's stopping you?

from doing what?

I don't want shitty AI slop; why would I start a company intent on generating it?

Re: DeepMind and OpenAI win gold at ICPC

#96

Post by reducesuffering »

NitpickLawyer wrote: post #2

So this year SotA models have gotten gold at IMO, IoI, ICPC and beat 9/10 humans in that atcoder thing that tested optimisation problems. Yet the most reposted headlines and rethoric is "wall this", "stangation that", "model regression", "winter", "bubble", doom etc.

People are having a tough time coping with what the near future holds for them. It is quite hard for a typical person to imagine how disruptive and exponential coming world events are like Covid showed.

Re: DeepMind and OpenAI win gold at ICPC

#97

Post by andy12_ »

zeroonetwothree wrote: post #69
andy12_ wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When I say 10 times cheaper, I mean when comparing models of the same capabilities. The kind of performance you get now for a 200$ subscription, a year ago probably would have costed 2000$.

I don’t believe that current models are 1000x better than the initial ChatGPT release. What metric are you using?

You don't? Now I use Gemini to code and optimize CUDA kernels. When I first used GPT3 in the OpenAI playground I was extremely impressed when I managed to get it to output a hello world program in C.

Re: DeepMind and OpenAI win gold at ICPC

#98

Post by amluto »

avcxz wrote: post #88
amluto wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I can confidently state that this is not true for the VAST majority of programmers and software engineers. That may well be true. I think it's even more true in cases where the user is not a programmer by profession. I once watched someone present their graduate-level research in a different field and explain how they had solved a real-world problem in their field by writing a complicated computer program full of c…

> That's a whole field of wonderful computer science / math that is mostly usable via a couple of extraordinarily expensive closed-source offerings. Take a look at Google OR-Tools: https://developers.google.com/optimization/

OR-Tools is a whole grab-bag of tools, most of which are wrappers around various solvers, including Gurobi and CPLEX. It seems like CP-SAT is under the OR-Tools umbrella, and CP-SAT may well be state-of-the-art for the specific sets of problems that it's well-suited for.

Re: DeepMind and OpenAI win gold at ICPC

#99

Post by Workaccount2 »

jaggs wrote: post #13

I think it's becoming clear that these mega AI corps are juggling with their models at inference time to produce unrealistically good results. By that it seems that they're just cranking up the compute beyond reasonable levels in order to gain PR points against each other. The fact is most ordinary mortals never get access to a fraction of that kind of power, which explains the commonly reported issues with AI models…

The bleeding edge behind closed doors token burning monsters of 2023 are bad compared to the free LLMs we have now.

I believe it was Sundar in an interview with Lex who said that the reason they haven't developed another Ultra model is because by the time it is ready to launch, the flash and pro versions will have already made it redundant.

Post reply on HN