Gary Marcus

Rank 10 of 47

Score 117

@prfsanjeevarora on the more technical side you have run roughshod over the most important distinction. virtually all machine learning systems can generalize to to some degree, but as i pointed out in 1998 (and many times since) contemporary systems have much more trouble generalizing out of

7/21/2025, 2:42:19 PM

In reply to:

Sanjeev Arora

@prfsanjeevarora

Completely misses the point. Nobody is suggesting that solving IMO problems is useful for math research. The point is that AI has become really good at complex reasoning, and is not just memorizing its training data. It can handle completely new IMO questions designed by a

Gary Marcus

@GaryMarcus

Quote of the day:

I certainly don't agree that machines which can solve IMO problems will be useful for mathematicians doing research, in the same way that when I arrived in Cambridge UK as an undergraduate clutching my IMO gold medal I was in no position to help any of the

The statement is part of a public discourse on the capabilities and limitations of AI in solving complex problems, specifically in the context of machine learning and generalization. The tone is critical and aims to clarify a technical distinction in the ongoing debate.

Principle 1:
I will strive to do no harm with my words and actions.
The statement does not appear to cause harm with words or actions. It focuses on a technical critique rather than personal attacks, adhering to the principle of doing no harm. [+1]
Principle 3:
I will use my words and actions to promote understanding, empathy, and compassion.
The statement aims to promote understanding by clarifying a technical point about machine learning systems' ability to generalize, which aligns with promoting understanding and empathy. [+1]
Principle 4:
I will engage in constructive criticism and dialogue with those in disagreement and will not engage in personal attacks or ad hominem arguments.
The statement engages in constructive criticism by addressing a specific technical point in the debate, rather than attacking the individual, which aligns with engaging in constructive dialogue. [+1]