upvote

points

by aaraujo0021 days ago |
comments
upvoteby tchalla1 days ago|
next
[-]
Why did you leave out the entire quote?

> At present, some frontier AI labs are testing advanced mathematical problems on proprietary models that remain inaccessible to the broader scientific community. Our recommendations are formulated with this practical context in mind. However, ideally, they would not do so. We want to state clearly from the start: we do not endorse this practice, and we ask them to stop testing advanced mathematical problems on proprietary models.

To me, the issue is that the models are proprietary which are only accessible to a few people in 2 digits. It's not about progress but access.

reply
upvoteby aaraujo0021 days ago|
parent|
[-]
Maybe, but it still seems like an excuse. OpenAI has a proprietary model capable of solving these problems and is willing to share the results with the mathematical community. So basically, the ask is to just not use the model and leave the problems unsolved?
reply
upvoteby adrian_m1 days ago|
parent|
next
[-]
The ask is to let mathematicians outside of OpenAI use it, ie. at least wait until the model is released.
reply
upvoteby strange_quark23 hours ago|
parent|
next
[-]
I don’t think that’s sufficient. If they want to be good stewards of mathematical research and not just doing marketing, they need to at the very least tell us the datasets and any techniques they used to train this model. IMO that’s probably just as if not more valuable than a dump of un-reviewed results.

They won’t because they don’t care and the only way it got this good is something along the lines of they trained on every mathematician’s codex sessions even if they opted out because they consider the thinking traces or output and metadata fair game.

reply
upvoteby blurbleblurble20 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
It's honestly shit marketing that only cultivates spite and erodes their whole brand. This is a total ego trip.
reply
upvoteby agnosticmantis23 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Which mathematicians though? Only fields medalists? Grad students? Any hobbyist wanting access?

These models are too expensive for broad access unfortunately.

reply
upvoteby Jtarii23 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
ChatGPT pro is accessible to literally anyone who has a job and lives in a developed country.
reply
upvoteby Jweb_Guru22 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Literally every single one of these papers was developed with an internal model that not even most OpenAI employees have access to.
reply
upvoteby anthonyrstevens8 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Why is this important? Do you not think that at some point, probably sooner rather than later, math researchers across the world will have access to similar capabilities?

This is sort of like discounting putting humans in space because only a few nations have the means to actually do it at the moment.

reply
upvoteby TeeWEE21 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
The work is not having AI poop out these docs the work is validating them and publishing them. OpenAI doesn’t care and wanted to race to publish potential findings and let others review it which is lazy and selfish
reply
upvoteby mattr031 days ago|
prev|
next
[-]
I don't think this is a reasonable take at all. Most work on maths has no real benefit other than to further human understanding of maths - it's more like an art. Nothing is gained from OpenAI solving all these problems but taking jobs from mathematicians. Other than advertising for OpenAI at least. It could not be more different from having AI work on disease research etc.
reply
upvoteby bravoetch1 days ago|
parent|
next
[-]
> Most work on maths has no real benefit other than to further human understanding of maths - it's more like an art.

It's been a while since I was reminded of this xkcd: https://xkcd.com/435/

reply
upvoteby zeroonetwothree22 hours ago|
parent|
prev|
[-]
Most math isn't just proving novel famous results. Just like most of software engineering isn't writing code.
reply
upvoteby jhrmnn1 days ago|
prev|
next
[-]
It all hinges on the definition of “progress”. The debate of the past month is all about questioning whether formally proving outstanding unproven theorems without human understanding constitutes progress. This is quite different from solving diseases.
reply
upvoteby andriy_koval18 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
without humans understanding who are currently losing entitlement. Regular Joe could never understand or claimed to understand high math.
reply
upvoteby medler1 days ago|
prev|
next
[-]
The rest of that document makes a pretty compelling case for why this is a bad practice
reply
upvoteby esafak1 days ago|
parent|
[-]
I fear that professional mathematics will wither, and there will be nobody left to digest the AI results of the future, leaving us unable to challenge the AI.
reply
upvoteby pixl9719 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Then make 2 AI's and force them to challenge each other.
reply
upvoteby 1 days ago|
prev|
next
[-]
deleted
reply
upvoteby osiris9701 days ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Comical ask
reply
upvoteby bmitc1 days ago|
prev|
next
[-]
Advocating purely for progress and not humanitarian value is how we'll all get enslaved.
reply
upvoteby perching_aix1 days ago|
prev|
next
[-]
The trope you're drawing a parallel with has a (to me) compelling counter though: there being a cure for every disease wouldn't stop people from getting sick.

How this maps back to math, idk.

reply
upvoteby warkdarrior1 days ago|
prev|
next
[-]
The latest posts from Terry Tao on Mastodon effectively ask for an AI to explain its results to human mathematicians.

> "I believe that AI can contribute positively in all of these directions [NB: exposition, community building, new directions of study]"

https://mathstodon.xyz/@tao/117395269325940185

reply
upvoteby binlog20 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
There are a dozen+ AIs available to you that can do that right now.
reply
upvoteby fph1 days ago|
prev|
[-]
...but we're not talking about diseases. Publishing an AI-generated Navier-Stokes solution does not save lives. (And, in fact, it harms some.)
reply
upvoteby Yamata18 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
It harms lives? How so?
reply
upvoteby fph1 hours ago|
parent|
[-]
Many mathematicians I know are shaken or depressed by these news of machiines that might put them out of business. Especially those who don't have tenure yet.
reply