Re:AI solves IMO problems at silver medal level
by golol on Thursday July 25, 2024 @01:01PM
(#41070880)
At the IMO "silver medal" afaik is define as some tange of points, which more or less equals some range of problems solved. For me it is fair to say that "silver-medal performance" is IMO langauge for about 4/6 problems solved. And what's the problem if some clickbait websites totally spin the result? They would've done it anyways even with a different title, and I also don't see the harm. Let people be wrong.
Re:AI solves IMO problems at silver medal level
by mathnmusic on Thursday July 25, 2024 @01:15PM
(#41071044)
No, "silver medal" is defined as a range of points to be earned in the allotted time (4.5 hours for both papers of 3 problems each).
If this were the case then the headline would be "AI solves 4/6 IMO 2024 problems", it wouldn't be claiming "silver-medal standard". Medals are generally awarded by comparison to other contestants, not to the challenges overcome.
> This can become a real mathematical assistant that can help a mathematician test an argument, play with variations of a definition, try 100 combinations of some estimates, apply a classic but lengthy technique etc. etc.
This is great, and I'm not complaining about what the team is working on, I'm complaining about how it's being sold. Headlines like these from lab press releases will feed the AI hype in counterproductive ways. The NYT literally has a headline right now: "Move Over Mathematicians, Here Comes AlphaProof".