Anna Gavenčiak

Karma: 272

Anna Gavenčiak 8 Oct 2026 0:12 UTC
18 points
0
in reply to: TsviBT’s comment on: Are OpenAI’s math results “creative” in an important way?
From https://github.com/openai/math:
The vast majority of results were obtained with the same procedure using an unreleased internal OpenAI model. On average, each result used three hours of ChatGPT Pro thinking compute with that model. Over the course of the evaluation, the model was posed approximately 4,000 problems. Aggregating the output into result families and manuscripts and requiring an appropriate level of significance led to the catalog outlined above.
Exceptions to this fixed procedure include work on a zero-free region for the Riemann zeta function and proof of the Hodge Conjecture for CM abelian varieties. Additionally, the writeup for the Re(s) > ¹¹⁄₁₂ zero-free region for the Riemann zeta function was human edited for readability.

Anna Gavenčiak 24 May 2024 11:31 UTC
2 points
1
in reply to: lesswronguser’s comment on: Apply to ESPR & PAIR, Rationality and AI Camps for Ages 16-21
Hopefully before the end of the month! More than a half of the applications were submitted only over the weekend, so there’s a lot to evaluate.

Anna Gavenčiak 14 May 2024 11:40 UTC
16 points
9
on: Why do we enjoy music?
You might enjoy Kevin Simler’s review of Why Do People Sing?: Music in Human Evolution. It’s a beautifully written essay offering some speculative and surprising answers I don’t want to spoil.
Re: predictive error explanation: You might say that a good music piece needs the right balance of familiarity, emotional impact and surprise even when you are listening to it on repeat.

Anna Gavenčiak 28 Nov 2023 13:13 UTC
5 points
0
in reply to: trevor’s comment on: My techno-optimism [By Vitalik Buterin]
Bostrom was trying to bait controversy to get podcast views
What’s this referring to?

Anna Gavenčiak 3 May 2021 9:15 UTC
11 points
0
on: Your Dog is Even Smarter Than You Think
From my experience, dog owners and people in general tend to see human-like patterns in dog behavior even when more simple explanations (“looking at the world through dog’s eyes”) have better predictive power.

As many dog owners would tell, dogs learn how to show their needs (staring at a door to be let outside, bringing a leash when they want to go for a walk, or a toy when they want to play, etc.). I find it pretty impressive that Bunny learned to communicate her needs through the board, but from what I’ve seen, I don’t really think there’s much evidence for some of the complex behaviour this post and the owner suggested there is.

I think that she learned which words or parts of the board to use in specific contexts (questions about time and place, mirror) but I don’t it shows she can tell time or recognize herself in the mirror (AFAIK, no dog can do that). On the other hand, I think that she can somewhat describe the world around her and I’m really curious what is the extent of this ability.

A lot of the behavior from the videos (eg. the negotiations) reminds me of a dog training technique when you let the dog try things and reward them when they do the thing you want. Dogs can get pretty creative this way and can generate novel behavior (which can be “shaped” into a more complex one). This way, Bunny learns sequences of words that generate amusement or other positive feedback (eg. the poop conversation).

Also, Bunny and her owner have a very strong bond and there are definitely many nonverbal cues happening.

That being said, I updated my model of dog cognitive skills and how can it be tested. I’m most excited about testing the ability to generalize and I expect I’ll look into it further.