cpard

Today, we are discussing if AI cheated by picking the easy problem to solve which means that we at least still comprehend what’s going on.

I wish mathematics and the rest of the human intellect wouldn’t turn into content marketing that is generated primarily to trigger strong human emotions.

I feel that this is going to hurt both AI and the disciplines that can benefit the most from it

You can make writes faster and part of that is by not dealing with schema resolution but you do push the work somewhere else there too.

I guess the same principles apply on many different levels, from when you write to the file system up to how you deal with conflicted data types during data ingestion.

I have experienced similar behavior between opus and haiku when benchmarking Dara engineering tasks. The “cheaper” model takes many more turns to figure out the task and this is without taking into account other important factors.

Another interesting behavior that I observed is that Haiku tended to cheat more maybe because it was having a harder time to find the root cause of the problem.

Benchmarking and evaluation of agentic systems is very interesting and if there’s one thing that someone should keep from the Databricks post is how important is for everyone to build and run their own.

A deterministic layer like a compiler or generator of code with some kind of IR that the LLM generates and feeds it with.

I feel we will be seeing this more and more in the near future.

Priests were interpreting the oracles (at least at a place like Delphi) according to the context of the people asking the questions aka participating in politics of that ancient times.

Subjectivity was a feature and I’m not sure that fits to mathematics though.

I wonder if mathematics as a science field moves more into engineering or if a different branch will emerge that is closer to that because to the point of the article, science is about understanding not just results.