Given a week or two to try out ideas and search the literature, I’m pretty sure that Freek and I could’ve solved this problem ourselves. Instead, though, I simply asked GPT5-Thinking. After five minutes, it gave me something confident, plausible-looking, and (I could tell) wrong. But rather than laughing at the silly AI like a skeptic might do, I told GPT5 how I knew it was wrong. It thought some more, apologized, and tried again, and gave me something better. So it went for a few iterations, much like interacting with a grad student or colleague. [...]
Now, in September 2025, I’m here to tell you that AI has finally come for what my experience tells me is the most quintessentially human of all human intellectual activities: namely, proving oracle separations between quantum complexity classes. Right now, it almost certainly can’t write the whole research paper (at least if you want it to be correct and good), but it can help you get unstuck if you otherwise know what you’re doing, which you might call a sweet spot.
— Scott Aaronson, UT Austin Quantum Information Center
Recent articles
- Claude Sonnet 4.5 is probably the "best coding model in the world" (at least for now) - 29th September 2025
- I think "agent" may finally have a widely enough agreed upon definition to be useful jargon now - 18th September 2025
- My review of Claude's new Code Interpreter, released under a very confusing name - 9th September 2025