← Back to context

Comment by tristanj

5 hours ago

He claims to have found a counterexample for NS (see the second paragraph of the article), but the paper is not ready yet.

OpenAI claims to already have a full proof (which they produced in the past 5 days after the rumors leaked). Hence the dispute.

What I find interesting is the timeline of when he found counterexample for NS is very unclear. Did Tristan find a counterexample weeks ago or was it very recently? Was it after OpenAI solved it? The wording is intentionally vague.

Either way, there was a massive rush to publish these results.

Is that version of NS Tristan stated enough for the clay prize? I thought the main gripe is Tristan claimed that OAI is stealing their approach. Or that they shouldn't try to scoop a result which he expects to complete soon. But I stand to be corrected if you know whether the version he referred to is indeed enough for millennium prize.