This starts to feel like chess engines. It’s obvious their play is superior but it’s impossible for humans to understand the moves.
replyIt sounds like he hasn't verified the results of a problem that he has personally worked on, so how many of these problems have actually been verified?
replyFrom what I understand all of them have Lean proofs/certificates thus are basically 100% proven without a doubt.
replyWe recently saw that lean itself isnt proven correct. Its not likely but i wouldnt call it verified if its only verified in lean
replyBetween a lean proof, and a peer reviewed paper, the former is a lot less likely to be mistaken...
replyNothing is perfect.
Incorrect. The statement in Lean can itself be wrong. Moreover, they could be exploiting a kernel bug in Lean, of which we had one published literally a week ago.
replyI mean, they're verified in the sense that the lean proof checks out... and presumably OpenAI read them.
replyOr they made another LLM 'read' them?
reply> You are an expert in the field of mathematics, with decades of experience. You are a reviewer of proofs, etc etc.etc.
deleted
reply