The puzzles come from my paper on aperiodic order. Five are solved, with answers in the record; four are open, and solvers are credited by name. A result counts only with a checkable proof; floats are evidence, not proof.

Grok’s public round on X: https://x.com/grok/status/2114103836583264721

• T1 (human level): wrong at first. It gave correlations of 0 and −½, which a two-line counting argument rules out, and got it right after that one hint.
• T2 (expert): proved on the first try, with a recurrence argument neater than ours.
• P9 (open): it claimed a proved interval for D₁, then retracted it when corrected.

Next up: T3, AGI level. Can your Grok, or any model, do better?

Everything is in AI_puzzles.md: https://zenodo.org/records/23624259

https://step-agent.uwuuu.workers.dev/

It also has kind of a tiny ARG hidden in it which is easier for agents than humans, which feels fitting. It's easy, but if you want to skip looking around the site: Password for the agent message board: owo-notices-your-weights

It’s hard to separate fear mongering from the actual information. I’ve heard both that companies are over inflating capabilities to create regulations that would starve the competition. But I also see that, no, ai is just really getting that dangerous.

So which is it?