Both impressive and terrifying. But as always, the methodology is buried: how many open problems were tried until they found a success?
If they tried this on 1000 problems and this is the one that succeeded, it still means that there are 999 open problems that an LLM cannot one-shot. It seems likely that this would remain the situation until the next model.
If this is the first one they tried, maybe we’re totally hosed.
The conclusions are so different in these cases that it is impossible to know what to think. Though it is reasonable, I think, to assume that a company is willing to push the maximally misleading narrative —- especially a company known for questionable ethical direction at the top, and one that is still circling an IPO, and one that is in the tech industry, where conjuring an illusion of growth and progress is sufficient for success.
They have to feed the bubble.
> But as always, the methodology is buried: how many open problems were tried until they found a success?
Not only that, but they have like 500 world-leading experts in mathematics and IMO alumni, so how do we know one of the agents wasn't hardcoded to return a proof that the mathematicians had found?
I'm a mathematician/graph theorist, and I've tried ChatGPT 5.3, 5.4, 5.5, and now 5.6 on a bunch of simple-ish open problems, and I've never gotten a solution.