Assessment of open AI math results
Users are evaluating the mathematical capabilities of advanced AI models like GPT-5.6 and Fable 5 by applying a standardized research rubric. The discussion centers on whether these models are achieving 'breakthrough' results in complex mathematical problem-solving.
Why it matters
Determining the true reasoning capabilities of AI models is critical for assessing their potential to contribute to scientific and mathematical research.
Igor Kotenkov on X: "It's hard for an ordinary person to understand the complexity of these tasks. I'm no mathematician, and I don't see a difference between e.g., results 3 and 10.
So I had GPT-5.6 Sol Pro and Fable 5 Max classify these using @EpochAIResearch OpenMath's rubric:
— "Solid Result": A strong researcher in the area would be happy if their median output addressed problems of this caliber. Still, the problem would probably not get much engagement outside of its subfield.
— "Major Advance": The median person working in a broad area of mathematics (on the scale of number theory or graph theory) would take note, and would likely make the time to understand at least the outline of the solution.
Get smarter about the news
Sign up free for a feed built around what you actually care about, Dive Deeper research on any story, and the full text of every article.
Create free accountAlready have an account? Sign in