Ethan's report

• Ethan Muldoon (Oregon State University (US))

Room: 405

Sean's report

• Sean Gilligan (Oregon State University)

Room: 405

Noah's report

• Noah Vaughan (Oregon State University)

Room: 405

Heidi's report

• Heidi Marie Schellman (Oregon State University (US))

Room: 405 Was able to build phlex

Paper of the week - OpenAI and sciene

• Heidi Marie Schellman (Oregon State University (US))

Room: 405 Questions to consider in reading this paper 1) Several of the authors work for private companies and probably own, or will own, significant # of shares in those corporations. Should they have disclosed their financial conflict of interest (in addition to their affiliations). 2) Are the results found as “novel” as advertised. I read the first example (section 1.1) and came to the conclusion that it seemed a trivial extension of an existing theorem with a proof that one might expect at the senior or beginning grad student level. 2 b) And, how ethical is it to state without including the resulting derivation and proof "We end this section by noting that our internal models, which can think for a few hours, were able to derive the optimal bound 1.75/L from scratch (i.e., without providing v1 of the paper in context, but simply asking the main question studied here directly).” 3) It would be useful for everyone to study section 2 which goes over ways in which chatGPT can be used (and misused) for literature searches.