This article is completely mistaken. The original researchers did not solve Navier-Stokes, while OpenAI did.
Ironically, this seems like the type of mistake you'd make if you used AI to do your research.
Ironically, this seems like the type of mistake you'd make if you used AI to do your research.
Going off the believable citations in the wiki page here, it seems more complicated than "who solved it", as there's a mathematician, Anthropic, and OpenAI having a priority dispute.
But when the central claim of the argument (that OpenAI and the researchers solved the same problem) is completely false, it’s hard to take the article seriously.
Author proceeds to take their audience for fools