Many people expect the AI paradigm to approximately AGI complete, and expect it to smoothly scale to AI that can do innovative science. i.e. the kind of science you'd need to do to develop a plague from scratch that actually kills all humans, with very limited opportunity to experiment. Or, the kind of science you'd need to solve alignment, so you could build a more powerful successor AI that shares your values.

A periodic thread of disagreement has been @TsviBT, @Steven Byrnes and some others arguing that, yes, the AIs are getting better at verifiable tasks, but they still seem to be missing some basic sauce that lets them actually form new concepts on the fly and apply them.

The AIs are getting better at "brute force creativity", where you try every single idea ever devised by Man in parallel and maybe one of them works. But there's still a kind of creativity that a) would have way higher efficiency and b) is maybe necessary for doing some kinds of breakthrough work.

On one hand, my subjective experience has been seeing AIs be able to demonstrate increasingly interesting judgement and taste in increasingly many domains (even open-ended ones). [...]

---

First published:
October 7th, 2026

Source:
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/neHiCSdL4tJDg7Hrm/are-openai-s-math-results-creative-in-an-important-way

---

Narrated by TYPE III AUDIO.

“Are OpenAI’s math results “creative” in an important way?” by Raemon

LessWrong (30+ Karma)

“Are OpenAI’s math results “creative” in an important way?” by Raemon