| ▲ | meander_water 2 hours ago | |
Can someone who understands maths more than me explain why it could only solve 372/8000 problems? What was it about the other problems that made them unsolvable? Was it just a time constraint, or are they just harder problems? | ||
| ▲ | impendia an hour ago | parent | next [-] | |
I'm a research mathematician. From what I can tell, the answer is roughly comparable to: if you posed 8,000 challenging open problems to the human math community, you might expect to see 372 of them solved within five years. Probably some combination of: some of the 372 problems were easier than the rest; the AI got lucky on these 372; there were existing papers out there in the literature which proved especially helpful for these 372; and other similar factors. | ||
| ▲ | random3 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
If it took 3h for one of them, perhaps there was a time/compute budget cutoff along with a sorting based on some relevance. | ||
| ▲ | n4r9 an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
My guess would be that these particular problems were vulnerable to an attack which built on recent advances and potentially tied in something unexpected from a distant area of mathematics. "Harder" is becoming harder to define. Harder for humans is probably not harder for LLMs. | ||
| ▲ | sebzim4500 an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | |
There must be an element of luck, if they ran the remaining problems again with the same time constraints presumably a bunch would be solved | ||