9 ms·

They haven't, not at all as far as I can tell. This math problem appears to be a nice chore to be solved, the equivalent to "Claude, optimize this code" or "Wri

They haven't, not at all as far as I can tell. This math problem appears to be a nice chore to be solved, the equivalent to "Claude, optimize this code" or "Write a parser", which is being done 100000x a day.

calf 6mo ago
But the title claims it is a "frontier" math problem, so which is it really.
famouswaffles 6mo ago
The original researchers who proposed this problem tried and failed multiple times to solve it. Does that sound like a 'nice chore to be solved' to you ?
- staticassertion 6mo ago
  That's interesting context, where do you see that? I'm going off of the label "Moderately interesting". edit: I see in the full write up that the contributor says that they'd estimate an expert would take 1-3 months to do this. They also note that they came up with this solution independently but hadn't confirmed it.
  - famouswaffles 6mo ago
    https://epochai.substack.com/p/first-ai-solution-on-frontiermath https://epochai.substack.com/p/first-ai-solution-on-frontier... >The newly-solved problem came from Will Brian, who had placed it in the Moderately Interesting category. It is a conjecture from a paper he wrote with Paul Larson in 2019. They were unable to solve it at the time, or in several attempts since. Brian had this to say.
    - staticassertion 6mo ago
      I actually still don't see the source for them trying several times, but we can take that for granted. Regardless, as I said: 1. It's labeled as "moderately interesting" 2. They said that they expect an expert could solve it in 1-3 months 3. They had already come up with the solution that the AI had but weren't convinced it would have worked So how big was the gap here, do you think?
      - famouswaffles 6mo ago
        Yes, a "moderately interesting" Open problem. I can't think of any chores that would take an expert months to complete. I can't think of any chores that I've completed but was then 'unconvinced could work'. Please sit down and think about what you are saying here. Are we still talking about chores ? One of the more strange phenomena with machines getting better and the incessant need (seemingly driven by human exceptionalism) to downplay each result, is that you just end up belittling humans in the process. This is significant. Your analogy is wrong. It's fine to admit it.
        staticassertion 6mo ago
        Writing a complex parser or certainly a compiler is a 1 - 3 month project, for example. Again, I'm not trying to downplay this, but to frame this accurately. I think an AI being able to build a parser/ compiler is cool too. > One of the more strange phenomena with machines getting better and the incessant need (seemingly driven by human exceptionalism) to downplay each result, is that you just end up belittling humans in the process. I don't believe in human exceptionalism at all, don't attribute positions to me.
        famouswaffles 6mo ago
        >Writing a complex parser or certainly a compiler is a 1 - 3 month project, for example. 1. Estimating time completion of something that has been done multiple times before and an open problem that has not yet been solved is a different matter entirely. 1 to 3 months is an educated guess and more likely than not, an underestimate. 2. I do not think months long complex compilers and parsers are being routinely completed by LLMs as your original comment implied. Regardless, they are different classes of problems.
        staticassertion 6mo ago
        I don't get what either of your points is intended to demonstrate. Let's revisit the first post I replied to: > It's deeply surprising to me that LLMs have had more success proving higher math theorems than making successful consumer software As far as I can tell, they absolutely have not had more success in this area relative to making successful consumer software.

calf 6mo ago

But the title claims it is a "frontier" math problem, so which is it really.

famouswaffles 6mo ago

The original researchers who proposed this problem tried and failed multiple times to solve it. Does that sound like a 'nice chore to be solved' to you ?

staticassertion 6mo ago
That's interesting context, where do you see that? I'm going off of the label "Moderately interesting". edit: I see in the full write up that the contributor says that they'd estimate an expert would take 1-3 months to do this. They also note that they came up with this solution independently but hadn't confirmed it.
- famouswaffles 6mo ago
  https://epochai.substack.com/p/first-ai-solution-on-frontiermath https://epochai.substack.com/p/first-ai-solution-on-frontier... >The newly-solved problem came from Will Brian, who had placed it in the Moderately Interesting category. It is a conjecture from a paper he wrote with Paul Larson in 2019. They were unable to solve it at the time, or in several attempts since. Brian had this to say.
  - staticassertion 6mo ago
    I actually still don't see the source for them trying several times, but we can take that for granted. Regardless, as I said: 1. It's labeled as "moderately interesting" 2. They said that they expect an expert could solve it in 1-3 months 3. They had already come up with the solution that the AI had but weren't convinced it would have worked So how big was the gap here, do you think?
    - famouswaffles 6mo ago
      Yes, a "moderately interesting" Open problem. I can't think of any chores that would take an expert months to complete. I can't think of any chores that I've completed but was then 'unconvinced could work'. Please sit down and think about what you are saying here. Are we still talking about chores ? One of the more strange phenomena with machines getting better and the incessant need (seemingly driven by human exceptionalism) to downplay each result, is that you just end up belittling humans in the process. This is significant. Your analogy is wrong. It's fine to admit it.
      - staticassertion 6mo ago
        Writing a complex parser or certainly a compiler is a 1 - 3 month project, for example. Again, I'm not trying to downplay this, but to frame this accurately. I think an AI being able to build a parser/ compiler is cool too. > One of the more strange phenomena with machines getting better and the incessant need (seemingly driven by human exceptionalism) to downplay each result, is that you just end up belittling humans in the process. I don't believe in human exceptionalism at all, don't attribute positions to me.
        famouswaffles 6mo ago
        >Writing a complex parser or certainly a compiler is a 1 - 3 month project, for example. 1. Estimating time completion of something that has been done multiple times before and an open problem that has not yet been solved is a different matter entirely. 1 to 3 months is an educated guess and more likely than not, an underestimate. 2. I do not think months long complex compilers and parsers are being routinely completed by LLMs as your original comment implied. Regardless, they are different classes of problems.
        staticassertion 6mo ago
        I don't get what either of your points is intended to demonstrate. Let's revisit the first post I replied to: > It's deeply surprising to me that LLMs have had more success proving higher math theorems than making successful consumer software As far as I can tell, they absolutely have not had more success in this area relative to making successful consumer software.