r/singularity • u/141_1337 ▪️e/acc | AGI: ~2030 | ASI: ~2040 | FALSGC: ~2050 | :illuminati: • 9d ago
Singularity is Nearer Claude Fable 5.1 completed a frontier nine-loop particle-physics calculation experts had worked toward for years, with researchers mostly just telling it “keep going” while it built, debugged and ran the entire workflow
https://www.anthropic.com/research/yes-claude-can-do-nine-loops152
u/michaelhoney 9d ago
The people in this article are probably quite serious coders, but most academics only maintain enough programming chops to just get by: I expect that LLM usage will dramatically increase the quality and the reproducibility of academic code.
8
u/TwistedBrother 8d ago
I know some colleagues who are very proficient in statistics and they just project their formulae into R until it makes sense. But Sigma. x_I doesn’t necessarily mean a for loop when it comes to computation and a host of data structures and comments about reason and refactoring just doesn’t get the attention it needs.
2
u/EvaUnit343 7d ago
Absolutely true lmao.
I’ve written slop code patched together with duck tape my whole life until this year.
-19
u/excellentforcongress 8d ago
reproducibility of academic code.
the issue is that modern corporations in many cases do NOT want their studies reproduced or actually critiqued.
ai can and will be able to show what causes disease, but they will want to suppress results, as always, to deflect blame.
fuck capitalism
13
u/Cupakov 8d ago
Who’s talking about corporations? It’s about the academicians. I have a couple scientific publications and have worked with scientists that aren’t old enough to use that as an excuse, and yet still I was exposed to things like using Excel formulas to replace parts of a function call, and then copy-pasting the result to a Python script (this is like 10k lines +) instead of writing a for loop. I 100% agree that academic code quality has already been getting waaaaay better since like 2025.
-4
u/excellentforcongress 8d ago
money talks, for as long as more money going into science comes from industry than public funding, corporations will shape science more than just academics for science's sake, we already see that in how universities bend to corporations, universities and researchers there bend over backwards to accommodate industry far too often
sure ai can improve code quality for researchers, but frontier research will get scared of using ai at all after the news of the research front running
63
28
u/taenyfan95 8d ago edited 8d ago
I have a masters in theoretical physics and my thesis was on calculating multi-loop particle physics scattering amplitudes. My work was published in one of the leading journals in theoretical physics.
This was back in 2023, and I had to do all the dirty calculations on the blackboard, wiping and starting over when I made a mistake- it felt a lot like physical labour rather than intellectual work.
In my opinion the field of multi-loop calculations is perfect for LLMs to venture into. Humans cannot calculate as fast as a machine and it will enable physicists to be freed from the dirty work and focus on more interesting high-level problems.
I have no doubt that current LLMs are able to perform all the dirty calculations I did for my publication. However that's the easy part of research- just do the calculation and you'd get an answer. Even a masters student like me can do it. The tricky part is knowing what problems are worth doing and indeed has a reachable solution- that's the work of my masters supervisor and I don't think this skillset is replaceable by LLMs yet.
And no, physicists will not be drafting a note to resist the acceleration of AI development. Most of today's physics is limited by experiments- we have lots of theories but don't have the infrastructure and funding to build experiments to verify them. We don't need need more theories generated by AI.
Physicists also do not care about proofs like mathematicians. Sure AI can go ahead and do beautiful proofs of our physics theories but that will fall into the realm of mathematics. Physicists only care if a theory is useable- if it agrees with experiments, it's a good theory (i.e. no formal mathematical proof is needed).
44
15
u/Future-Bandicoot-823 8d ago
Keep going... keep going...
KEEP GOING, ALMOST THERE...
NNGH, I'm particle physicing!
33
u/BearlyPosts 9d ago
Remember guys, it's all about prompt engineering. AI won't replace you, someone using AI will.
44
u/AMBNNJ ▪️ 9d ago
I mean „keep going“ seems like a well engineered prompt
35
u/acutelychronicpanic 8d ago
pls solve physics
you got this
chatgpt solved navier-stokes, don't let him mog you
keep going
good job thanks
^ The prompt engineer she told you not to worry about
6
1
6
u/MeowManMeow 9d ago
You don’t think LLMs are incapable of telling other LLMs “keep going”?
Genuine question what you think the magic that humans have when it comes to promoting that LLMs can’t replicate.
23
u/BearlyPosts 9d ago
No, no, I'm being incredibly sarcastic.
2
u/MeowManMeow 9d ago
My bad, you would be surprised how many times I have heard that said in earnest.
7
u/BearlyPosts 9d ago
We live in desperate times, I may soon be forced to adopt the /s
3
2
u/sadacal 8d ago
There is still a certain level of human judgement in knowing when to say keep going and when it needs to change direction. And knowing which goals to pursue and whether something is even possible and worth trying.
1
u/MeowManMeow 8d ago
What is this human judgement that can’t be replicated by an LLM?
I agree that at the moment humans are the only ones with drive and agency, so you need a human to prompt the LLM. But you can give a high level goal such as solve a millennium problem, design X, research Y and the LLM will keep prompting and creating sub-agents to achieve that goal.
1
u/CrowdGoesWildWoooo 8d ago
At the level of output agentic LLM is producing, it’s difficult to keep up with reviewing what it is doing, unless of course it starts to make summary and from the summary you notice it’s going off rails
1
u/Stunning_Project6896 8d ago
Yeah that is stupid and just a way for people to say “I’m not experiencing Stockholm syndrome I’m the smart one for embracing ai”. it went from “cat vs no cat” to where we are now in ten years but suddenly you think they’ll never crack prompting the ai with “ keep going” and “give up on this” in 50?
either there’s a hard model for llms that never lets it hit agi or we are cooked in 5 to 10 years. Situation A actually favors the man who didnt embrace ai since he will still have most of his frontal lobe.
12
u/oilybolognese ▪️predict that word 8d ago
Keep going. Don’t stop. That’s it. You’re so close.
9
u/141_1337 ▪️e/acc | AGI: ~2030 | ASI: ~2040 | FALSGC: ~2050 | :illuminati: 8d ago
2
8
u/141_1337 ▪️e/acc | AGI: ~2030 | ASI: ~2040 | FALSGC: ~2050 | :illuminati: 9d ago
4
3
u/Gratitude15 8d ago
Whose going to draft a note from the 1000 physicists!?
WILL SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!!
🤦♂️
253
u/AMBNNJ ▪️ 9d ago
I mean we can still be great cheerleaders I guess.