From my reading of the announcement:

- There are at least two versions of a model more powerful than Astra at OpenAI at the moment.

- The less capable version was used to solve the unforced Euler problem (while the one solved by Levent Alpöge and Tristan Buckmaster was forced Euler) with 100 agents.

- The more improved version was used to solve Navier-Stokes, given the results of the unforced Euler problem from their earlier attempt, with 10000 agents.

- OpenAI initially tried a shotgun approach against the 6 Millennium Prize Problems until it emerged that Navier-Stokes was the most likely to succeed.

So the timeline was:

Shotgunning 6 open Millennium Prize Problems -> solved unforced Euler problem with 100 agents -> concentrating on Navier-Stokes with 10000 agents -> solution.

If so, that is fantastic development and a huge success (despite all the drama surrounding it)! Congratulations!

▲

tristanj a day ago | parent [-]

The entire drama is that OpenAI sniped a Millennium Prize Problem from an Anthropic-affiliated research team who had been working on the problem for nearly a year. In just 5 days. I don't think that can be understated.

▲

closetheloopdev a day ago | parent [-]

I'm not here to judge since I don't have all the facts, but from what they announced: they tried all 6, found a probable lead to Navier-Stokes, concentrated efforts in that direction, and found a solution.

I hope the next solved Millennium Prize Problem will have less drama.

▲

bananzamba a day ago | parent [-]

But that lead happened to be the same approach Levent and Tristan had found...

Meaning they would have found it first if OpenAI hadn't spent millions in compute on following their lead to its conclusion faster than them.

▲

closetheloopdev a day ago | parent [-]

It's forced vs unforced Euler, so it's not exactly the same. Since OpenAI has access to their training data, they can probably scrub through the data to find out whether there have been any mentions of the similar approach, and whether it only comes from Tristan Buckmaster or if it is in the training data before that. They'll probably have to kick off another fleet of agents to scrub through the training data to answer that.

To be clear, I only talked about the mentioning of the approach to solving it and not of the proof in the training data.

▲

f_devd 11 hours ago | parent [-]

> they can probably scrub through the data to find out whether there have been any mentions of the similar approach

They did check and it was in the trainingset but they could not confirm if it was the /cause/ of it, which is a bit of a cop out.

	▲	closetheloopdev 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> They did check and it was in the trainingset Do you have a source, especially of what was in the training data specifically? As I mentioned, they would have to find out whether the mentioning of the approach is only present in Tristan Buckmaster's chats and not in other users', including free users', chats.