upvote

points

by Sharlin4 hours ago |
comments
upvoteby buttered_toast4 hours ago|
next
[-]
I would interpret it as implying that the result was due to a lot more hand-holding that what is let on.

Was the initial conjecture based on leading info from the other authors or was it simply the authors presenting all information and asking for a conjecture?

Did the authors know that there was a simpler means of expressing the conjecture and lead GPT to its conclusion, or did it spontaneously do so on its own after seeing the hand-written expressions.

These aren't my personal views, but there is some handwaving about the process in such a way that reads as if this was all spontaneous involvement on GPTs end.

But regardless, a result is a result so I'm content with it.

reply
upvoteby lupsasca2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Hi I am an author of the paper. We believed that a simple formula should exist but had not been able to find it despite significant effort. It was a collaborative effort but GPT definitely solved the problem for us.
reply
upvoteby buttered_toast2 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
Oh that's really cool, I am not versed in physics by any means, can you explain how you believed there to be a simple formula but were unable to find it? What would lead you to believe that instead of just accepting it at face value?
reply
upvoteby lupsasca2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
There are closely related "MHV amplitudes" which naively obey a really complicated formula, but for which there famously also exists a much simpler "Parke-Taylor formula". Alfredo had derived a complicated expression for these new "single-minus amplitudes" and we were hoping we could find an analogue of the simpler "Parke-Taylor formula" for them.
reply
upvoteby buttered_toast2 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Thank you for taking the time to reply, I see you might have already answered this elsewhere so it's much appreciated.
reply
upvoteby lupsasca1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
My pleasure---thank you for your interest!
reply
upvoteby etraql1 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Do you also work at OpenAI? A comment pointing that out was flagged by the LLM marketers.
reply
upvoteby buttered_toast1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
I think it says in the paper that he does, but it's also public knowledge.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/alex-lupsasca-9096a214/

reply
upvoteby lamontcg3 hours ago|
prev|
next
[-]
That's kinda the whole point.

SpaceX can use an optimization algorithm to hoverslam a rocket booster, but the optimization algorithm didn't really figure it out on its own.

The optimization algorithm was used by human experts to solve the problem.

reply
upvoteby Sharlin3 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
In this case there certainly were experts doing hand-holding. But simply being able to ask the right question isn't too much to ask, is it? If it had been merely a grad student or even a PhD student who had asked ChatGPT to figure out the result, and ChatGPT had done that, even interactively with the student, this would be huge news. But an average person? Expecting LLMs to transcend the GIGO principle is a bit too much.
reply
upvoteby slopusila4 hours ago|
prev|
[-]
hey, GPT, solve this tough conjecture I've read about on Quanta. make no mistakes
reply
upvoteby co_king_34 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
[dead]
reply
upvoteby terminalbraid3 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
"Hey GPT thanks for the result. But is it actually true?"
reply