REVIEW 3 cited by
Large Language Model for Science: A Study on P vs. NP
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
abstract
In this work, we use large language models (LLMs) to augment and accelerate research on the P versus NP problem, one of the most important open problems in theoretical computer science and mathematics. Specifically, we propose Socratic reasoning, a general framework that promotes in-depth thinking with LLMs for complex problem-solving. Socratic reasoning encourages LLMs to recursively discover, solve, and integrate problems while facilitating self-evaluation and refinement. Our pilot study on the P vs. NP problem shows that GPT-4 successfully produces a proof schema and engages in rigorous reasoning throughout 97 dialogue turns, concluding "P $\neq$ NP", which is in alignment with (Xu and Zhou, 2023). The investigation uncovers novel insights within the extensive solution space of LLMs, shedding light on LLM for Science.
Forward citations
Cited by 3 Pith papers
-
RICo: Refined In-Context Contribution for Automatic Instruction-Tuning Data Selection
RICo scores instruction examples by their in-context perplexity effect on an assessment set, then trains a lightweight selector to pick top-scoring data, achieving better benchmark results from 5% to 15% of the original data.
-
Smotrom tvoja pa ander drogoj verden! Resurrecting Dead Pidgin with Generative Models: Russenorsk Case Study
An LLM agent reproduces many known Russenorsk linguistic properties from a newly compiled dictionary, and can generate speculative Russenorsk translations, but the evaluation partly reflects prompt leakage.
-
LLM4SR: A Survey on Large Language Models for Scientific Research
A systematic review of LLM-based systems for hypothesis discovery, experiment planning, scientific writing, and peer review, including benchmarks, evaluation methods, and open challenges.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.