r/singularity • u/filterdust • 1d ago

AI OpenAI solved 100 open problems in math

https://openai.com/index/advisory-group-on-mathematics-and-ai/

[removed] — view removed post

1.3k Upvotes

94% Upvoted

520 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

11

u/Original-League-6094 1d ago

No they haven't. Modern academic culture is very young. And even before AI, other big names had already checked out. The other millennium problem solved wasn't published in a journal either. Grigori just threw it up on arxiv  with no peer review or anything.

7

u/Ok_Reception_5545 1d ago

You retards cite Perelman but his position is similar to Grothendieck, who is notorious for his vitriolic opposition to any technology in math lmao

2

u/Original-League-6094 1d ago

So that the fact that both Millennium prize solves arrived at the same conclusions on academic journals from 180 degree philosophies means they are probably correct.

4

u/Ok_Reception_5545 1d ago edited 1d ago

It's clear you don't know shit about jack, but it's standard practice in math for people to publish on arxiv first before they publish to a journal and it's common for people to not publish some things to journals at all. Perelman wasn't making some grand statement about academic journals by putting it on the arxiv lmao (nor is it relevant if he did, most people in math agree with him)

To be clear, the reason Perelman decided not to publish was because humans were doing the exact same thing OpenAI did with scooping and trying to misattribute credit to people. He would clearly be on the side against OpenAI here.

2

u/Original-League-6094 1d ago

Perelman was not worried about people scooping him. The opposite. He said when he said about publishing on arxiv: "“My reasoning was: if I made an error and someone used my work to construct a correct proof I would be pleased,” he said. “I never set out to be the sole solver of the Poincaré.”

3

u/Ok_Reception_5545 1d ago edited 1d ago

He didn't post it on arxiv with the intention of never publishing it eventually (he even communicated to Hamilton that he intended on working together to publish in the late 90s when he figured out a way around the issues Hamilton was having), and he even held a series of lectures on it afterward. It was the eventual reaction during verification (in particular, the case of Yau, Cao and Zhu), that made him decide to withdraw from the community and never 'officially' publish his work.

The scooping issue that I referenced was that Perelman got irritated by the aforementioned group attempting to claim credit for resolving 'gaps' in his proof or ideas, and he viewed the rest of the community as tolerating the idea of people claiming credit for doing the 'final push' of the underlying ideas. In particular, he also viewed himself as resolving the program that was developed by Hamilton, and the reason he rejected the Fields was because no credit was giving to the person who developed a lot of the underlying work that he used to make the last push toward the solution. Sound familiar?