Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit
mathisfun123 | on: Ten advances in mathematics and theoretical computer science
I don't disagree with you but there's no need for exaggeration; ain't no high school student writing this:

> In particular, proofs for special graph classes, constructions of cycle covers with some edges covered other than twice, bounded-length or prescribed-cycle variants, reductions to another unproved conjecture, computational verification through any fixed graph size, and candidate counterexamples without a complete nonexistence certificate are insufficient.

which is infact a very important part of the prompt.

don_esteban | parent
the fact that such things have to be explicitly in the prompt points to the fact that the underlying system is still far from where it needs to be (basically, lacks basic understanding what a proof is)
skinner_ | root | parent | next
No, that's not what this is. This is a warning to the LLM that coming back with partial results is not good enough.

Take a grad student with a perfectly good understanding of what a proof is. Their supervisor gives them a major problem to work on. Almost always, the problem is too hard, the student comes back with partial results, and student and the supervisor iterate from there. Now imagine that they have an unusually cruel and unreasonable advisor who tells them, do not dare to talk to me until you've fully solved the problem. This paragraph is exactly that. It's there exactly because the underlying system is smart enough to know that real mathematicians do not work like that.

loading story #49143317
famouswaffles | root | parent | next
They don't have to be. At this point, we have multiple results from 3rd parties where the prompts are very basic.

To name a few:

- https://xcancel.com/DmitryRybin1/status/2079904005652893709

- https://archive.ph/2w4fi (https://chatgpt.com/share/69dd1c83-b164-8385-bf2e-8533e9baba...)

mathisfun123 | root | parent
you cannot be serious