logoalt Hacker News

kyproyesterday at 6:56 PM5 repliesview on HN

Let's extend this by asking: If an AI model can solve an extremely well known Math problem which has been open for centuries but hasn't be solved by a human mathematicians, why wouldn't that same model be able to find ways to improve it's own algorithms beyond that of the capabilities of human mathematicians / ML researchers?

The singularity is approaching.


Replies

etermyesterday at 7:04 PM

AI has clearly been extensively used to improve models. The evidence for this is how far Anthropic went in nerfing Fable to prevent it being used to improve models.

solid_fueltoday at 12:25 AM

> The singularity is approaching.

There have been apocalyptic preachers foretelling the end times for my entire life. Interesting to see how the language has changed, even as the predictions fail again and again.

show 1 reply
Difwifyesterday at 7:02 PM

I believe it's already well accepted in these labs that we're in the Singularity. It happened on a Tuesday back in February. No one seemed to really notice and life went on... for now.

show 1 reply
evilfredyesterday at 8:53 PM

the AI model has NOT solved Riemann

show 1 reply
logicchainsyesterday at 7:15 PM

>why wouldn't that same model be able to find ways to improve it's own algorithms beyond that of the capabilities of human mathematicians / ML researchers

Because algorithms have lower bounds, and the computational characteristics of LLMs are well-characterized by papers like https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.07923 . No amount of intelligence can make something faster than a mathematically-proven lower bound, any more than it could make 1+1=3 (that's why every single successful production transformer architecture has some form of O(N^2) attention layers, because it's mathematically impossible to achieve the same expressive power without any). There is room for speedup where current implementations are slower than the proven lower bound, but not when they're already close to it.

show 1 reply