Hi, Iā€™m Eric and I work at a big chip company making chips and such! I do math for a job, but itā€™s cold hard stochastic optimization that makes people who know names like Tychonoff and Sylow weep.

My pfp is Hank Azaria in Heat, but you already knew that.

  • 0 Posts
  • 14 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: January 22nd, 2024

help-circle
  • Lmaou. ā€œWe need to alignment pill the Russian youth.ā€ Fast forward to the year 20XX and the haunted alignment pilled adults are now ā€˜aligningā€™ their bots to the worldā€™s top nuclear armed despot.

    tony_soprano_how_could_this_happen.jpg (for some reason awful systems wonā€™t let me upload pictures anymore (惎ą² ē›Šą² )惎)

    Holy Moses in heaven, iirc both Sam and Dario have said that their urge to build the torment nexus came from being inspired by online RAT forums. Maybe alignment ā€˜pillingā€™ youths is counterproductive to human flourishing? As the LWers say, ā€œupdate your priors fuckheadsā€




  • The ARC scores donā€™t matter too much to me at 3k a problem. Like the original goal of the prize had a compute limit. You canā€™t break that rule and then claim victory ( I mean I guess you can, but like not everyone is gonna be as wowed as xitter randos, ensemble methods were already hitting 80% + acc to francois )

    And unfortunately, with Frontier math, the lack of transparency w.r.t. which problems were solved and how they were solved makes it frustrating as hell to me, as someone who actually would like to see a super math robot. According to the senior math advisor to the people who created the data set, iirc 40% solved problems were in the easiest category / 50% in the second tier category and 10% were in the ā€œhardā€ tier, but he said that he looked at the solutions and that they looked like mostly being solved ā€˜heuristicallyā€™ instead of plopping out any ā€˜newā€™ insights.

    Again, none of this is good science, just pure shock and awe. Iā€™ve heard rumors that OAI is hiring strong competition style mathematicians to supervise the reinforcement learning for these types of problems and if they are letting O3 take the test, then how the hell does that not leak the problem set? Like now the whole test is compromised now right? Since this behemoth uses enough electricity to power a city block, theres no way they would be able to run it locally. Now OAI can literally pay their peeps to solve the rest and surprise surprise O3++ will hit 80%

    OTOH, with code forces scores and math scores this high, I can now put on my LW cap and say this model has 2 trillion IQ, so why hasnā€™t it exterminated me and my family yet like big Yud promised? Itā€™s almost as if there is no little creature inside trying to take over the world or something.



  • I remember when several months (a year ago?) when the news got out that gpt-3.5-turbo-papillion-grumpalumpgus could play chess around ~1600 elo. I was skeptical the apparent skill wasnā€™t just a hacked-on patch to stop folks from clowning on their models on xitter. Like if an LLM had just read the instructions of chess and started playing like a competent player, that would be genuinely impressive. But if what happened is they generated 10^12 synthetic games of chess played by stonk fish and used that to train the model- that ainā€™t an emergent ability, thatā€™s just brute forcing chess. The fact that larger, open-source models that perform better on other benchmarks, still flail at chess is just a glaring red flag that something funky was going on w/ gpt-3.5-turbo-instruct to drive home the ā€œeMeRgEnCeā€ narrative. Iā€™d bet decent odds if you played with modified rules, (knights move a one space longer L shape, you cannot move a pawn 2 moves after it last moved, etc), gpt-3.5 would fuckin suck.

    Edit: the author asks ā€œwhy skill go down thoā€ on later models. Like isnā€™t it obvious? At that moment of time, chess skills werenā€™t a priority so the trillions of synthetic games werenā€™t included in the training? Like this isnā€™t that big of a mysteryā€¦? Itā€™s not like other NN havenā€™t been trained to play chessā€¦








  • Yes, the classical algo achieves perfect accuracy and is way faster. There is also a table that shows the cost of running o1 is enormous. Like comically bad. Boil a small ocean bad. Weā€™ll just 10x the size and it will achieve 15 steps inshallah.

    Imo, this is like the same behavior we see on math problems. More steps it takes, the higher the chance it just decoheres completely. I canā€™t see any reason why this type of thing would just ā€œclickā€ for the models if they are also unable to do multiplication.

    I mean this just reeks of pure hopium from OAI and co that things will magykly work out. (But the newer model is clearly better^{tm}! I still donā€™t see any indication that one day that chart is just going to be 100s across the board.)