5 ms·

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

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.

lupsasca 7mo ago
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.
- buttered_toast 7mo ago
  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?
  - lupsasca 7mo ago
    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.
    - buttered_toast 7mo ago
      Thank you for taking the time to reply, I see you might have already answered this elsewhere so it's much appreciated.
      - lupsasca 7mo ago
        My pleasure---thank you for your interest!
- etraql 7mo ago
  Do you also work at OpenAI? A comment pointing that out was flagged by the LLM marketers.
  - buttered_toast 7mo ago
    I think it says in the paper that he does, but it's also public knowledge. https://www.linkedin.com/in/alex-lupsasca-9096a214/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/alex-lupsasca-9096a214/
    - lupsasca 7mo ago
      Correct, on both counts!

lupsasca 7mo ago

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.

buttered_toast 7mo ago
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?
- lupsasca 7mo ago
  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.
  - buttered_toast 7mo ago
    Thank you for taking the time to reply, I see you might have already answered this elsewhere so it's much appreciated.
    - lupsasca 7mo ago
      My pleasure---thank you for your interest!
etraql 7mo ago
Do you also work at OpenAI? A comment pointing that out was flagged by the LLM marketers.
- buttered_toast 7mo ago
  I think it says in the paper that he does, but it's also public knowledge. https://www.linkedin.com/in/alex-lupsasca-9096a214/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/alex-lupsasca-9096a214/
  - lupsasca 7mo ago
    Correct, on both counts!