overview of all results is here:
https://github.com/openai/math/blob/main/overview.pdf
Several are fields medal worthy results. One proves the Riemann hypothesis for Re(z) >7/8, which is a substantial improvement over previous results
You must log in or register to comment.
- schipelblorp@sh.itjust.worksEnglish8 days
You think a company shooting for a $2 trillion IPO is going to publish complete and honest information?
- FauxLiving@lemmy.worldEnglish8 days
Sounds conspiratorial. Which of these problems did you find incomplete or dishonest?
It’s mathematics, there’s no ‘trust me bro’ required the proof is either logically consistent or it isn’t.
You can check the proofs, they’ve even provided them in lean: https://github.com/openai/math/tree/main/lean
- schipelblorp@sh.itjust.worksEnglish8 days
How many of those over 700 proofs have you evaluated yourself?
Whatever critcisms of the proofs by OpenAI is unlikely to be found in documents published by OpenAI.
Here’s one criticism of one proof:
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/did-openai-solve-the-wrong-navier-stokes-problem/
Edit: I’m not saying that none of those proofs are correct, but if you want a full and complete picture of what those proofs are and what they mean in context, you’re absolutely not going to get it from OpenAI. Mathematics is not “just trust me bro”, nor is it publishing press releases.
8 daysDownvotes? Use your words.
If this is a scam or indicative of evil, etc, it deserves upvotes. Otherwise it sort of looks like plugging your ears, guys.
Downvote is probably because the source is OpenAI so this is just an ad.
- lemonhead2@lemmy.worldEnglish8 days
I posted this. I don’t like open ai much for various reasons. but you can’t argue with the quality of some of these results
