Great Post! I was actually hoping you'd write a post like this, detailing what strategies high-level problem solvers use and how they use them. (I know you said all of us do, and that's true to a degree, but c'mon now...)
I also am very eager to see your analysis of the strengths and limitations of o1 mini and o1 preview-- I've found o1 mini to be much more capable and sophisticated at math/physics problems, and o1 preview has been able to solve the last 3 NYTimes Connections puzzles I've given it, whereas the previous 4o model couldn't solve these at all. Especially because Connections was the kind of puzzle where it seemed to require too much creativity/originality to just solve it using previous training data.
Anyway, I'd be interested in a hype-free analysis of the current new models, if that seems useful to you.
I haven't had / made time to play with o1 yet but am very much looking forward to it. I've also been accumulating a huge pile of bookmarks of other people's reactions. At some point my plan is to read through all of the early takes and see whether I can find anything to add to the conversation.
We squeaked through in second place, with 171 points, just ahead of Hungary at 170 and the USSR at 169. (West) Germany blew everyone away with 212. At the time, Beating The Russians felt like a big deal.
The next year (when I was also on the team) we slipped to a tie for 4th place with Hungary, and the USSR crushed it (235 points, second place was Bulgaria with 203, we had 195).
I remember being told at the time that the US had never placed below 5th. I don't think anyone ever said "so don't blow it" but it definitely felt like a lot of pressure...
Great Post! I was actually hoping you'd write a post like this, detailing what strategies high-level problem solvers use and how they use them. (I know you said all of us do, and that's true to a degree, but c'mon now...)
I also am very eager to see your analysis of the strengths and limitations of o1 mini and o1 preview-- I've found o1 mini to be much more capable and sophisticated at math/physics problems, and o1 preview has been able to solve the last 3 NYTimes Connections puzzles I've given it, whereas the previous 4o model couldn't solve these at all. Especially because Connections was the kind of puzzle where it seemed to require too much creativity/originality to just solve it using previous training data.
Anyway, I'd be interested in a hype-free analysis of the current new models, if that seems useful to you.
I haven't had / made time to play with o1 yet but am very much looking forward to it. I've also been accumulating a huge pile of bookmarks of other people's reactions. At some point my plan is to read through all of the early takes and see whether I can find anything to add to the conversation.
How did the US team do at the IMO in 1983?
We squeaked through in second place, with 171 points, just ahead of Hungary at 170 and the USSR at 169. (West) Germany blew everyone away with 212. At the time, Beating The Russians felt like a big deal.
The next year (when I was also on the team) we slipped to a tie for 4th place with Hungary, and the USSR crushed it (235 points, second place was Bulgaria with 203, we had 195).
I remember being told at the time that the US had never placed below 5th. I don't think anyone ever said "so don't blow it" but it definitely felt like a lot of pressure...
https://www.imo-official.org/year_country_r.aspx?year=1983