| ▲ | lajamerr 4 hours ago | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
You can tell an agentic system. "Go and find a novel area of math that has unresolved answers and solve it mathematically with verified properties in LEAN. Verify before you start working on a problem that no one has solved this area of math" That's not creative prompt. That's a driving prompt to get it to start its engine. You could do that nowadays and while it may spend $1,000 to $100,000 worth of tokens. It will create something humans haven't done before as long as you set it up with all its tool calls/permissions. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | awesome_dude 2 hours ago | parent [-] | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Let me know when the Fields medal arrives in the mail. It won't because even though it looks clever to you, people who /do/ understand math and LLMs understand that LLMs /are/ regurgitating Why does your LLM need you to tell it to look in the first place? Why isn't just telling us all the answers to unsolved conjectures known and unknown? Why isn't the LLM just telling us all the answers to all the problems we are facing? Why isn't the LLM telling us, step by step with zero error, how to build the machine that can answer the ultimate question? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||