That's totally disjointed from anything in this thread. The main accusation is that openai is cherrypicking math problems and we should be against these results. As if a mathematical proof stops being provably correct because it was cherry picked

And frankly these "concerns" ignore reality. In any research phd course you're actively told to bite off something small and likely to be provable so that you can prove it (and publish it). Openai telling its computer to do that is no different that your phd advisor telling you that.

> In any research phd course you're actively told to bite off something small and likely to be provable so that you can prove it (and publish it).

But that's the start of math research, not the end.

The point is to get practice and experience doing research.

Did ChatGPT learn anything from these proofs, that it can build on?

Part of what's annoying people is that ChatGPT is churning though problems that are meant to be motivating. They are problems that aren't worth the effort of human professionals (usually because they are incredibly computation-hevy, so better suited for a computer than a human), so they are good for students to work on.

It's disjointed?

The post that started this sub-thread asked:

> 1. How many total problems were given to the model, and what percent were left unsolved at what cost before giving up? 2. How many attempts did you give the model at solving these problems? 3. How expensive was the harness, e.g. did the model have access to a job cluster?

I think it's an extremely relevant question to ask, because it helps us better understand the current state of AI being able to handle math, for exactly the reasons I outlined. I was arguing against the idea this is just a reactionary anti-AI kind of question to ask. It's not! You can be very impressed by what AI is capable of in math (I am) and still think those are really interesting things for OpenAI to disclose (I do).

OpenAI specifically called out a $2000 per problem average, which implies something that's probably not true ("if you throw $2k at us we'll solve an open problem for you"). It would be cool to know what the actual number is.