214 points kensai 3 hours ago 43 comments
trilogic 2 hours ago | parent
havaianaslife 1 hour ago | parent
sandermvanvliet 1 hour ago | parent
chews 1 hour ago | parent
tonyhart7 1 hour ago | parent
AndrewKemendo 1 hour ago | parent
Makes perfect sense and I’m glad that CERN is focusing on EU providers
parineum 51 minutes ago | parent
It makes more sense if they're the only company who was willing to work on a more custom solution for the proposed LHC model but I don't that a bit as it would be great PR for the frontier labs.
This seems a lot more like an effort to bolster European AI by moving CERN money into Mistral.
swingandamiss 1 hour ago | parent
malux85 1 hour ago | parent
sheikhnbake 1 hour ago | parent
As opposed to enshitifying the lives of the working class in most other areas.
x187463 1 hour ago | parent
zamadatix 1 hour ago | parent
Legend2440 1 hour ago | parent
setopt 1 hour ago | parent
rixed 7 minutes ago | parent
timbaboon 1 hour ago | parent
blueplanet200 48 minutes ago | parent
https://arxiv.org/abs/1207.7214 - The original ATLAS Higgs discovery paper uses neural nets to identify photons. It also uses a neural net b-tagger to improve the H->WW signal to noise ratio.
https://arxiv.org/abs/1303.0763 - used neural nets extra tt+jets noise https://arxiv.org/abs/1503.05066 - used neural nets for signal/background separation.
timbaboon 23 minutes ago | parent
blueplanet200 7 minutes ago | parent
Um, I believe I have linked you to "actual analysis" where techniques used are more exotic than boosted decision trees.
zetazzed 1 hour ago | parent
criemen 1 hour ago | parent
Lichtso 55 minutes ago | parent
What I think the parent post is missing is that breakthroughs in science don't immediately translate into breakthroughs in engineering and even less so into economically viable products.
parineum 50 minutes ago | parent
ajkjk 53 minutes ago | parent
fallingbananna 52 minutes ago | parent
On the other hand, you could downplay the math findings a bit, since it didn't further our understanding of mathematics just yet, only provided proves to things we didn't have proves for.
gpm 40 minutes ago | parent
Advances in math will probably result in advances in science, which in turn will result in advances in engineering (which is probably where the average person sees an actual benefit in their day to day life). But it's not automatic and a lot of the hand wringing by mathematicians about the AI math results include "is this (AI) method of finding proofs actually going to result in as many of those downstream advances as the old fashioned way?"
(I include theoretical CS as a subfield of math - and believe the S in it is a misnomer).
Fraterkes 31 minutes ago | parent
(in)Conveniently those are also the fields where most ordinary people would experience the most effects from accelerated progress. Dario famously promises potential cures for cancer and dementia.
andy99 56 minutes ago | parent
I don’t think it’s going away, LLMs and other ML stuff will no doubt remain part of people’s workflow, but I also see no evidence for superabundance or anything close to it.
spwa4 45 minutes ago | parent
Gerard t' Hoofd (under Martinus Veldman) proved in 1971 that Yang-Mills gauge theories are renormalizable, using a rule-based AI (LISP-styled but manually written in assembly) called "Schoonschip" (I'm guessing called that because there were several failed attempts that went before and failed). This program was an AI in the sense of a search algorithm searching symbolic proofs. It got the 1999 Nobel prize in Physics.
This was hugely important because first, it showed that it was possible to make the Standard Model of physics and it also helped beyond that by showing for a lot of (at that point considered) impossible theories exactly how to make them work (meaning not just a proof that it could be done, but a long list of "if you have problem X, do Y" recipes). One of these became first the "electroweak unification", then the standard model.
Hao Wang proved that the logic of "Principia Mathematica" was actually correct using another symbolic proof generator. His efforts were also the start of many other such programs that contributed lots of stuff to mathematics that nobody sane was ever going to do, such as finding all the higher-order versions of the quadratic formula (there's a lot of them).
At Stanford university, tens of thousands of molecules were found in 1965 by having an AI, this one was what's called an "expert system", evaluate mass spectroscopy data and combine it with chemistry knowledge in the form of rules about what was possible or not possible and if only one option remained, spit it out. It almost doubled the sum total of our chemistry knowledge if counted by known molecular structures. It was later adapted to make mass spectroscopy useful in finding the composition of samples.
Then there's Alphafold, first a ConvNet (Resnet+Convnet to be exact), then switched to the transformer architecture, which gave use the folding of just about every protein we have ever found, and even more proteins that we've never even found. Nobel prize in Chemistry 2024.
GuB-42 40 minutes ago | parent
Less modern AI (aka. machine learning) is used all the time in science. I don't know of any commercial breakthrough yet, but there are some promising developments, like in antibiotics. If it materializes, that would be a very big deal.
jolt42 35 minutes ago | parent
sureMan6 35 minutes ago | parent
ruaraidh 29 minutes ago | parent
drivebyhooting 22 minutes ago | parent
zzzeek 21 minutes ago | parent
Revanche1367 31 minutes ago | parent