the news now

The world's news, cross-checked among reputable sources.

This is a new development in a story we have covered before · earlier coverage

OpenAI Claims Solution to Millennium Prize Problem Amid Allegations of Data Misuse

4 sources across 4 countries · Brazil · France · Netherlands · Spain

Who reported this

  • Folha de S.Paulo Brazil · Centre · Grupo Folha (Frias family)
  • Next.ink France · Centre · INpact Mediagroup, subscriber funded
  • NRC Netherlands · Centre · Mediahuis
  • El Pais Spain · Centre-left · Grupo PRISA

What the colours mean

  • Left
  • Centre-left
  • Centre
  • Centre-right
  • Right
  • A hatched block means the outlet is affiliated with, or controlled by, a state.

Political lean describes where an outlet sits within the politics of its own country. It is never a position on a single global scale.

Political lean is comparable inside one country and not across them, which is why the bar groups by country first. Publicly funded broadcasters are not marked as state-linked.

The owner of each outlet is listed as a matter of record, not as a judgement about the outlet.

OpenAI has announced that its artificial intelligence has solved the Navier-Stokes problem, one of the Millennium Prize Problems established by the Clay Mathematics Institute. The problem concerns the existence and regularity of solutions for equations describing the behavior of viscous fluids. According to reports, OpenAI utilized a network of approximately 10,000 collaborating AI agents to reach the solution in 88 hours. While a Princeton expert confirmed the result is a solution to the challenge, other mathematicians have noted that the accompanying paper is difficult to read. The Clay Mathematics Institute requires a solution to be published in a peer reviewed journal and widely accepted for two years before a prize is awarded.

The announcement has been met with accusations of scientific misconduct. Tristan Buckmaster, a mathematician at New York University, and Levent Alpöge had recently made significant progress on the same problem. Buckmaster alleges that OpenAI may have used his project data without authorization. He claims that after he contacted OpenAI to clarify that his work was a personal collaboration and not an official project by his colleague's employer, Anthropic, OpenAI suddenly claimed a breakthrough using an approach similar to his own. OpenAI later stated on X that it is possible anonymized data was used by its systems. El Pais reports that OpenAI subsequently corrected its test to cite the mathematicians it had previously ignored.

Coverage of the event varies by political lean. Center outlets focus on the specific sequence of events regarding the potential unauthorized use of researcher data. A center left outlet emphasizes the company's failure to credit the Spanish researchers involved. A center outlet highlights the potential for bad scientific practices and the lack of peer review. Another center outlet frames the event as a major milestone for artificial intelligence and human thought.

How each side framed it

Centre-left
The center left outlet framed the story as a matter of corporate recognition and the failure to credit specific researchers.
Centre
Center outlets focused on the procedural controversy regarding data usage and the validity of the scientific method.

Sources

80% of the statements in this article were traced back to the source articles listed above.