Hacker News Reader

If you think all they need to do is "just that" (try, verify, repeat as you say) then I think you're very, very mistaken.

There is no way for the LLM to bruteforce the search space any better than a human. What it can do better, tho, is to make connections between seemingly (for us) unconnected notions and join them, then verify if that's right.

Your view is not only wrong but also condescending in this day and age.

View on HN

That’s literally how AlphaEvolve works. And presumably how OpenAI’s research loop works if they’d ever publish it.

They put an LLM in a loop, with a reward function, and keep trying to get a higher score. The reward function for AlphaEvolve is “did this code get a better score or faster”, for math research it’s “did it write a LEAN proof”.

I’m open to hearing that I’m wrong but I don’t think I am. I agree that LLMs make connections that humans wouldn’t, but eventually you need to verify those because otherwise the connection it made may as well be a lie unless proven otherwise.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com