logoalt Hacker News

square_usualtoday at 8:20 PM4 repliesview on HN

It's interesting to me that whenever a new breakthrough in AI use comes up, there's always a flood of people who come in to handwave away why this isn't actually a win for LLMs. Like with the novel solutions GPT 5.2 has been able to find for erdos problems - many users here (even in this very thread!) think they know more about this than Fields medalist Terence Tao, who maintains this list showing that, yes, LLMs have driven these proofs: https://github.com/teorth/erdosproblems/wiki/AI-contribution...


Replies

loire280today at 8:40 PM

It's easy to fall into a negative mindset when there are legions of pointy haired bosses and bandwagoning CEOs who (wrongly) point at breakthroughs like this as justification for AI mandates or layoffs.

show 1 reply
lovecgtoday at 8:35 PM

Let’s have some compassion, a lot of people are freaking out about their careers now and defense mechanisms are kicking in. It’s hard for a lot of people to say “actually yeah this thing can do most of my work now, and barrier of entry dropped to the ground”.

show 2 replies
epolanskitoday at 8:29 PM

It's an obvious tension created by the title.

The reality is: "GPT 5.2 found a more general and scalable form of an equation, after crunching for 12 hours supervised by 4 experts in the field".

Which is equivalent to taking some of the countless niche algorithms out there and have few experts in that algo have LLMs crunch tirelessly till they find a better formula. After same experts prompted it in the right direction and with the right feedback.

Interesting? Sure. Speaks highly of AI? Yes.

Does it suggest that AI is revolutionizing theoretical physics on its own like the title does? Nope.

show 2 replies
hgfdatoday at 8:41 PM

It is not only the the peanut gallery that is skeptical:

https://www.math.columbia.edu/~woit/wordpress/?p=15362

Let's wait a couple of days whether there has been a similar result in the literature.

show 1 reply