Thread

1. simianwords · 1790879920 · focus · HN ↗

   [dead]

   1. mcphage · 1790881141 · focus · HN ↗

      > that never believed that AI could solve Millennium problems (or same in spirit)

      How did that situation end up? Did it solve it on its own, or did it rip off another mathematician's work?

      1. JBits · 1790882336 · focus · HN ↗

         I have to say, it's hilarious to me that solving a Millennium problem has given mathematicians a reason to doubt the mathematical abilities of LLMs.

         1. mcphage · 1790887282 · focus · HN ↗

            I don't think it was the LLM solving a Millennium problem—it was the LLM solving a Millennium problem followed immediately by a mathematician claiming that their work had been ripped off.

            1. JBits · 1790893982 · focus · HN ↗

               I agree. The idea that mathematical achievements by LLMs could involve plagiarism didn't seem common before but now the question can be asked of any new novel proof of construction generated by LLMs.

               It's also notable that the Open AI proof may not even be interesting to mathematicians.

               Even if people already had an idea that LLMs were training on user inputs, it's the first time it's actually caused an issue. Mathematicians, and plenty of researchers, working in ambitious or competitive field now have a very good reason to avoid LLMs.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.