[jacobgold]

> If someone unskilled at math brings a calculator to an international math competition, they will not succeed at solving many problems.

> But if they bring a frontier LLM (and succeed at concealing it from the organizers), they can walk away with a gold medal.

Of course you could win all kinds of math competitions with a concealed calculator. Maybe you'd need a fancy one, like a little SBC running Python. Anything complex and timed would be easy to win. You'd look like a genius to anyone who didn't know you had it.

> Such a feat requires intelligence... and if the contestant didn't provide the intelligence himself/herself, where'd it come from?

From computer software running on computer hardware, just like a calculator.

Calculating trillions of digits of pi also requires intelligence far beyond human capacity.

Computers displaying intelligence doesn't imply human-like intelligence. This is the source of confusion.

[scarmig]

The idea that a calculator, or a calculator with Python, or even a calculator with a proof assistant (and every book ever written on math) would help a random person at e.g. IMO or Putnam is fairly revealing.

[jacobgold]

The idea that anyone would think anyone else would think that is fairly revealing.

[CamperBob2]

Yeah, this is definitely one of those "Smile, nod, back away slowly, reach for doorknob" threads.

[CamperBob2]

Of course you could win all kinds of math competitions with a concealed calculator. Maybe you'd need a fancy one, like a little SBC running Python.

My mistake.

[jacobgold]

Taking issue with using a computer to power the calculator? If so, you should know that all modern calculators are computers under the hood.

Everything I've written about calculators applies to computers doing any kind of traditional deterministic processing, without anything like LLMs.