The blog post argues that GPT-4.5, despite rumors and speculation, likely isn't a drastically improved "frontier model" exceeding GPT-4's capabilities. The author bases this on observed improvements in recent GPT-4 outputs, suggesting OpenAI is continuously fine-tuning and enhancing the existing model rather than preparing a completely new architecture. These iterative improvements, alongside potential feature additions like function calling, multimodal capabilities, and extended context windows, create the impression of a new model when it's more likely a significantly refined version of GPT-4. Therefore, the anticipation of a dramatically different GPT-4.5 might be misplaced, with progress appearing more as a smooth evolution than a sudden leap.
OpenAI has not officially announced a GPT-4.5 model. The provided link points to the GPT-4 announcement page. This page details GPT-4's improved capabilities compared to its predecessor, GPT-3.5, focusing on its advanced reasoning, problem-solving, and creativity. It highlights GPT-4's multimodal capacity to process both image and text inputs, producing text outputs, and its ability to handle significantly longer text. The post emphasizes the effort put into making GPT-4 safer and more aligned, with reduced harmful outputs. It also mentions the availability of GPT-4 through ChatGPT Plus and the API, along with partnerships utilizing GPT-4's capabilities.
HN commenters express skepticism about the existence of GPT-4.5, pointing to the lack of official confirmation from OpenAI and the blog post's removal. Some suggest it was an accidental publishing or a controlled leak to gauge public reaction. Others speculate about the timing, wondering if it's related to Google's upcoming announcements or an attempt to distract from negative press. Several users discuss potential improvements in GPT-4.5, such as better reasoning and multi-modal capabilities, while acknowledging the possibility that it might simply be a refined version of GPT-4. The overall sentiment reflects cautious interest mixed with suspicion, with many awaiting official communication from OpenAI.
Summary of Comments ( 42 )
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43230965
Hacker News users discuss the blog post's assertion that GPT-4.5 isn't a significant leap. Several commenters express skepticism about the author's methodology and conclusions, questioning the reliability of comparing models based on limited and potentially cherry-picked examples. Some point out the difficulty in accurately assessing model capabilities without access to the underlying architecture and training data. Others suggest the author may be downplaying GPT-4.5's improvements to promote their own AI alignment research. A few agree with the author's general sentiment, noting that while improvements exist, they might not represent a fundamental breakthrough. The overall tone is one of cautious skepticism towards the blog post's claims.
The Hacker News post titled "GPT-4.5: "Not a frontier model"?" discussing the Interconnects.ai article of the same name generated a moderate number of comments, mostly focusing on speculation about GPT-4's architecture and OpenAI's strategy.
Several commenters debated the meaning of "frontier model" and whether GPT-4 qualifies. Some suggested that "frontier" implies a significant architectural leap, while others argued that performance improvements alone could justify the label. There was skepticism about the author's claim that GPT-4 isn't a frontier model, with some pointing to its demonstrably improved capabilities compared to its predecessors.
A recurring theme was the idea of GPT-4 being a mixture of experts (MoE) model. Commenters discussed the potential advantages and disadvantages of this approach, such as improved performance on specific tasks versus increased complexity and cost. Some speculated that OpenAI might be using a smaller number of experts than initially envisioned, possibly due to practical limitations. This speculation tied into discussions about the cost of running inference on larger models and the trade-offs between model size and performance.
Several commenters discussed the potential for future models and advancements in AI. Some anticipated the emergence of truly transformative models, while others expressed doubt about the current trajectory of research. There was also discussion about the competitive landscape, with speculation about Google's Gemini and other upcoming models.
Some commenters focused on the practical implications of GPT-4's capabilities, such as its potential impact on various industries and the need for responsible development and deployment.
While there wasn't a single overwhelmingly compelling comment, the discussion as a whole offered a range of perspectives on GPT-4, its architecture, and its place within the broader context of AI development. The speculation about MoE architecture, the debate about the definition of "frontier model," and the discussion of the cost/performance trade-offs were particularly insightful threads.