Most people on Lemmy would never admit that LLMs have any use case whatsoever. Even though they’ve literally solved math problems at the limits of modern research.
Several research mathematicians have stated publicly that they believe the Navier Stokes proof to be correct: Luis Silvestre, Javier Gómez-Serrano, Steven Strogatz, Gonzalo Cao-Labora, and Sébastien Gouëzel. I have not heard much controversy about whether the results are correct or not, moreso that the proofs are poorly written and would not be accepted by a referee in their current state.
Most people on Lemmy would never admit that LLMs have any use case whatsoever. Even though they’ve literally solved math problems at the limits of modern research.
Do you have a reasurch paper on that?
https://openai.com/index/navier-stokes-solution/
https://openai.com/index/building-scientific-understanding-with-academic-communities/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenAI_bulk_release_of_mathematical_papers
Several research mathematicians have stated publicly that they believe the Navier Stokes proof to be correct: Luis Silvestre, Javier Gómez-Serrano, Steven Strogatz, Gonzalo Cao-Labora, and Sébastien Gouëzel. I have not heard much controversy about whether the results are correct or not, moreso that the proofs are poorly written and would not be accepted by a referee in their current state.