i wonder how much *the fact that LLMs were able to solve this* being out there in the world will affect the ability for future LLMs to produce more novel results, purely "psychologically". they've been through a lot of "calibration" training to not overclaim or even attempt things they "know" they shouldn't be able to do, not give broken theories of quantum physics to every random schizo etc. but since we've now clearly reached the point where truly novel discoveries *are* possible, and can show the models extremely strong and clearly not-eval evidence of this (via extensive websearch + literal novel proofs), i wonder if just telling them to learn about this problem before asking them to try something entirely different will improve their performance/ unshackle a little.

@__alpoge__

here’s opus 4.7’s texed up version of mythos’s argument: https://t.co/MaJWVPqLbJ. i found it amusing that mythos was so nervous about the fame of the open problem that it stuck to the first choice, here X = d_n^2, that got it a contradiction, when simply choosing X a large…