Critic doubts AI 'research taste': nanogpt hillclimbing missed obvious wins
anpaure · x · 2026-10-07
anpaure mocks pzeroresearch's claimed AI 'research taste': it amounts to short-horizon autoresearch hillclimbing. Citing nanogpt, he notes tens of thousands of AI-hours spent on it without automated search producing what a random person casually suggested. He later clarifies he isn't criticizing the work itself, only the overclaim, and still finds it useful.
Related event: ML Researchers Spar Over the Definition of "Research Taste"(6 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- What Three-Body Problem's longtermism teaches about facing an ASI-level threat — JacquesThibs · 2026-10-08
- COLM'26: MathDuels self-play benchmark co-evolves difficulty across 19 frontier models — AI4Code · 2026-10-08
- OpenAI releases new math results from frontier model as mathematicians 'grieve' — TheTuringPost · 2026-10-08
- eigenrobot debates EA forecasting: quantitative beats vague "I'm unsure" — eigenrobot · 2026-10-08
- OpenAI math results push LLMs toward 4 of 7 Millennium Prize problems, and one VC says AGI is here — deedydas · 2026-10-08
- Gary Marcus Slams OpenAI's Vague Math Proof Report: Zero Details, Won't Pass Peer Review — GaryMarcus · 2026-10-08