TechPulseTechPulse
Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

75% Positive

Analyzed from 731 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#run#more#hackathon#math#llm#hours#models#yourself#why#trying

Discussion (18 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

Semkas•about 3 hours ago
Won't deny that this is an interesting idea, but I feel like waiting on the output of an LLM for 40 hours feels like it is completely antithetical to what makes classic Hackathons appealing / educative.

More generally, I don't think the shape of a hackathon (intensely working for a short timespan) maps at all onto the way LLM Math progress has seemingly been made so far; AFAIK it mostly involves picking out something for the Model, then having it run for a week with sporadic correction / encouragement.

falcor84•2 minutes ago
But it's not "waiting on the output of an LLM for 40 hours" any more than a regular hackathon is "waiting for my damn teammates to finish their part for 40 hours". From my experience using agentic coding for hackathons, the best teams are those that coordinate with the AI agents in relatively quick cadence, generally giving it small tasks and steering it often. Teams may want to run some long-running sessions too, especially closer to the deadline, but even then, they'd probably want to run and follow several sessions in parallel, and continuously inspect their work so that they have reasonable confidence that their main efforts will wrap up before the deadline. There is an art to it.
Donald•6 minutes ago
Have you done any math hacking with sol/astra or fable? It’s more fun than using them for coding. The models are great at the monotony, like constructing a Gröbner-basis, etc. But they’re all still absolutely awful at coming up with new ideas, new proof methods, or new constructive forms. So you spend all your time on coming up with novel hypotheses yourself and handing off the rote work to an agent.

It’s also quite fun to get instant results by finding isomorphisms into unfamiliar areas of mathematics that previously would’ve required some networking in order to build a collaborative relationship.

Aboutplants•about 3 hours ago
If the goal is to accomplish something then why limit yourself with available tools?

I’m not a full on AI optimist but it is absolutely the most powerful tool in a host of applications. From a Hackathon perspective, obviously in the 90s it was much more unorganized, but the same ethos existed. Use all available tools to accomplish the goal/task, it’s where a lot of incredible learning came out of. The same will hopefully happen in scenarios like this one

a2ff6eeb0•about 2 hours ago
It seems like making progress on math is letting the AI run fully autonomously for a few days, occasionally asking it to keep going.

I'm not sure people need to organize a mathathon to wait for a computer to give a printout. They mainly need tokens.

jhonof•about 1 hour ago
I think the purpose of an event like this would be to optimize the process so that it isn't just occasionally asking an AI to keep going.
charlieyu1•about 2 hours ago
Are they actually autonomous? I’d say subject knowledge at the prompt stage plays a large part towards getting proper results
loloquwowndueo•about 3 hours ago
If the goal is to run 42km why limit yourself? Use a car and win.
thatseasy•about 1 hour ago
> why limit yourself with available tools

Because the companies that run frontier models are malevolent by every metric.

They are destroying the environment, especially those in neighborhoods of low income people.

They are empowering their owners who are some of the most deplorable and duplicitous people living.

They are destroying personal compute to avoid competition with local models by buying all computer components with “promised money” and forcing their P into AI.

They stole the entire creative output of humanity and are trying to sell it back to us.

They are only good for giving wealth access to skill while removing from the skilled the ability to access wealth.

They are being used to kill in war and for surveillance.

Seriously why would you use them? Your use only emboldens them; making you complicit in their nefarious success.

I for one, am one who walks away from Omelas.

Fraterkes•about 2 hours ago
Did you read the article? This is not a hackathon where you build software, it’s one where you’re trying to get a model to make progress on a frontier math problem. The point is that that activity may not map well onto the shape of a hackathon
chaoxu•about 2 hours ago
I've applied as a team, hope I get in.

Recently I care about how to create harness for mathematics that uses up the complete reasoning ability of the model. I care about both capability and cost.

Most generic harness we have now are not made for maximizing reasoning. I've tested agents like codex, and rarely the cost of reasoning tokens reaches more than 20%. Which is quite strange as math requires a lot of reasoning. So hackathons can be a good test bed.

amelius•38 minutes ago
Will BigAI support this with free access to lots of hardware loaded with frontier models?
youoy•about 2 hours ago
Should I read this as the big labs trying to move maths forward? Or the big labs trying to use professional mathematitians as (cheap?) Labour for validating LLM outputs? On yesterdays "An Alien Mind" post from openAI they openly said that maths is not a priority for them, so I personally know what to think...
tzs•44 minutes ago
Probably many mathematicians want answers to the questions from the page:

> This AI advancement raises the following questions: (a) How much can AI speed up the process from ideation to peer-reviewed publication? (b) What is the role of a mathematician when AI can solve conjectures faster?

and the big AI companies agreed to sponsor them to find out because it is good publicity for the companies.

blondie9x•about 1 hour ago
Yeah it's a bit of a tricky situation. It's almost like a bribe in a sense.
charlieyu1•about 4 hours ago
Interesting, if only I still have energy to work on something 40 hours non-stop