메뉴
BL
The Decoder • 17일 전

수학자 폭로: OpenAI 연구원이 앤스로픽 소속 공동저자 논문 제외 압박

IMP
8/10
핵심 요약

수학자 트리스탄 벅마스터는 나비에-스토크스 방정식 연구에서 AI 지원 돌파구를 이룬 뒤 OpenAI 연구원 세바스찬 부벡으로부터 공동저자 레벤트 알프뢰게(앤스로픽 소속)를 논문에서 빼라는 압박과 경고를 받았다고 주장했습니다. OpenAI는 이를 부인하며 내부 모델이 독자적으로 증명을 완성했다고 반박했고, 자사 결과를 공개했습니다. 이 사건은 AI 기업 간 경쟁이 학계의 공동연구 관행과 저자권에 미치는 영향을 보여줍니다.

번역된 본문

수학자 트리스탄 벅마스터는 자신과 레벤트 알프뢰게가 AI 모델을 활용해 나비에-스토크스 방정식에서 진전을 이룬 후 OpenAI로부터 압박을 받았다고 주장합니다. 벅마스터에 따르면 OpenAI는 내부 모델이 동일한 특이한 경로를 따르는 약 100 페이지 분량의 증명을 산출했다고 주장했습니다. 그는 프로젝트 내내 모든 초안을 Codex에 업로드해 왔다고 말합니다. 벅마스터에 따르면 부벡은 알프뢰게가 앤스로픽에 재직 중이라는 이유로 저자 명단에서 제외하길 두 차례 요구했으며, 벅마스터가 거절하자 "왜 당신 커리어를 망치려 하는가?"라고 물었다고 합니다.

업데이트: OpenAI가 자사의 나비에-스토크스 결과를 공개했습니다. 회사에 따르면 이 증명은 약 1만 개의 협업 AI 에이전트가 88시간에 걸쳐, OpenAI가 "GPT-6 Astra보다 상당히 더 능력 있는" 것으로 설명하는 내부 모델로 산출했으며, Lean으로 형식화되었습니다. 연구 책임자 마크 첸은 컴퓨팅 비용만 "수백만 달러"라고 밝혔습니다. OpenAI 개발자 노엄 브라운은 익숙한 패턴을 지적합니다. o3 출시 당시 ARC-AGI 벤치마크에서 87.5%를 달성하는 데 약 50만 달러가 들었지만, 오늘날 Astra는 약 20달러로 더 많은 작업을 수행할 수 있습니다. 2025년 수학 올림피아드에서는 OpenAI와 구글 딥마인드 모두 막대한 컴퓨팅이 필요했지만, 2026년에는 20달러짜리 ChatGPT 구독자 누구나 그 수준에 도달할 수 있습니다. 브라운은 "1년 후면 누구나 손끝에서 이 수준의 문제를 해결할 수 있는 AI를 갖게 될 것"이라고 썼습니다.

OpenAI의 반박 WIRED 보도에 따른 언론 브리핑에서 OpenAI는 벅마스터의 주장에 반박했습니다. 부벡은 WIRED에 "우리는 연구자든 에이전트든 그들의 작업이 지난밤 공개되기 전까지 전혀 보지 못했다"고 말했습니다. 그는 OpenAI가 알프뢰게와 벅마스터 연구의 우선권을 인정하며 그들의 "기념비적 업적"을 축하한다는 점을 "명확히" 하고 싶다고 밝혔습니다. OpenAI 수학자 벤 찬드라세카란은 회사의 해법이 벅마스터와 알프뢰ge의 접근법과 근본적으로 다르다고 말했습니다. 부벡은 OpenAI가 8월 28일 고급 수학 능력을 갖춘 새 모델 학습을 시작했으며, 앤스로픽의 진전 소문을 듣고 나비에-스토크스 문제에 더 많은 자원을 재배치했다고 밝혔습니다. "일요일 아침에 최종 해법을 Lean 형식화까지 모두 완료했습니다."

원문 기사: 수학자 트리스탄 벅마스터는 AI 지원 연구 정보가 유출된 후 OpenAI가 자신에게 압박을 가하고, 공동저자를 논문에서 빼려 하고, 협박했다고 설명합니다.

트리스탄 벅마스터와 공동저자 레벤트 알프뢰게는 AI 모델을 사용해 수학계에서 가장 유명한 미해결 문제 중 하나인 나비에-스토크스 방정식에서 중대한 진전을 이뤘습니다. 이 문제는 각각 100만 달러의 상금이 걸린 일곱 개의 근본적인 수학 문제 목록인 클레이 밀레니엄 문제에 속합니다. 벅마스터는 이제 OpenAI를 향한 심각한 혐의를 담은 공개 성명을 발표했습니다.

두 수학자는 앤스로픽의 Claude와 GPT-5.6 Sol을 구동하는 OpenAI의 Codex를 포함한 다양한 AI 모델로 수개월간 작업했습니다. 이들에 따르면 8월 중순까지 여러 돌파구를 달성했습니다. 또한 특정 나비에-스토크스 변형에 대한 결과를 찾았다고 믿지만, 아직 공개되거나 공식적으로 검증되지는 않았습니다. 공인된 증명은 수학계에 큰 사건이자 AI 지원 연구의 이정표가 될 것입니다.

소문이 OpenAI에 전해지고 압박 시작 9월 초, 대규모 수학 돌파구에 대한 소문이 돌기 시작했습니다. 벅마스터에 따르면 알프뢰게는 자신들의 연구 정보가 OpenAI에 전달되었다는 소식을 들었습니다. 9월 3일, 벅마스터는 선제적으로 OpenAI의 한 수학자에게 연락해 사실을 정리하고, 이 연구가 순수하게 개인적인 협업이라는 점을 강조했습니다.

원문 보기
원문 보기 (영어)
OpenAI researcher allegedly pressured mathematician to drop Anthropic co-author from math breakthrough paper Matthias Bastian View the LinkedIn Profile of Matthias Bastian Sep 8, 2026 Nano Banana Pro prompted by THE DECODER Key Points Mathematician Tristan Buckmaster says OpenAI pressured him after he and Levent Alpöge made progress on the Navier-Stokes equations using AI models. OpenAI claimed an internal model had produced a roughly 100-page proof following the same unusual path, according to Buckmaster. He and Alpöge had uploaded all their drafts to Codex throughout the project. Bubeck twice asserted he wanted Alpöge removed from authorship because he works at Anthropic, Buckmaster says. When Buckmaster refused, Bubeck allegedly asked: "Why would you ruin your career?" Ask about this article… Search Update: OpenAI has published its Navier-Stokes results. The company says the proof was produced by about 10,000 coordinated AI agents in 88 hours, using an internal model that OpenAI describes as "significantly more capable than GPT-6 Astra." The proof was also formalized in Lean. Research lead Mark Chen said the compute alone cost "in the millions of dollars." OpenAI developer Noam Brown points to a familiar pattern . When OpenAI launched o3, hitting 87.5 percent on the ARC-AGI benchmark cost about $500,000. Today, Astra can do more for roughly $20. The 2025 Math Olympiad required massive compute from both OpenAI and Google Deepmind. By 2026, anyone with a $20 ChatGPT subscription could match that. "I believe that a year from now everyone will have an AI at their fingertips capable of solving problems of this caliber," Brown writes. Ad OpenAI rejects Buckmaster's allegations In a press briefing (via WIRED) , the company pushed back against Buckmaster's allegations (see below). "We, whether it’s the researchers or the agents, did not see any of their work until it was released publicly last night," Bubeck said, according to WIRED . Ad He wanted to "be extremely clear" that OpenAI recognizes the priority of Alpöge and Buckmaster's work and congratulates them on their "monumental achievement." OpenAI mathematician Ven Chandrasekaran said the company's solution differs fundamentally from the approach Buckmaster and Alpöge took. Bubeck said OpenAI began training a new model with advanced math capabilities on August 28. After hearing rumors about progress at Anthropic, the company shifted more resources toward the Navier-Stokes problem. "On Sunday morning we had the final solution, Lean-formalized, and everything." Ad Original article: Mathematician Tristan Buckmaster describes how OpenAI pressured him after information about his AI-assisted research leaked, tried to remove his co-author from the paper, and threatened him. Ad Tristan Buckmaster and his co-author Levent Alpöge used AI models to make major progress on one of the most famous unsolved problems in mathematics: the Navier-Stokes equations. They're part of the Clay Millennium Problems , a list of seven fundamental math questions, each carrying a million-dollar prize. Buckmaster has now published a public statement leveling serious allegations against OpenAI. Ad The two mathematicians had spent months working with various AI models, including Anthropic's Claude and OpenAI's Codex running GPT-5.6 Sol. By mid-August, they say they'd achieved several breakthroughs. They also believe they found a result for a specific Navier-Stokes variant, though it hasn't been published or formally verified yet. A recognized proof would be a massive deal for mathematics and a landmark for AI-assisted research. Rumors reach OpenAI and the pressure starts In early September, rumors about a major math breakthrough started circulating. According to Buckmaster, Alpöge got word that information about their work had been passed along to OpenAI. On September 3, Buckmaster proactively reached out to a mathematician at OpenAI to set the record straight, stressing that the work was a purely personal collaboration with no institutional agreements. OpenAI responded the same day, asked for details, and offered compute resources. Buckmaster suggested a call the following week, but OpenAI pushed harder. On Friday, they asked if he could talk that same day. On Sunday at 12:45 p.m., they wanted to know if he was available "at any point today." OpenAI claims its own breakthrough using the same approach That Sunday, OpenAI's Sébastien Bubeck joined the conversation. During two phone calls, OpenAI told Buckmaster that an internal model had produced a roughly 100-page proof for the Navier-Stokes equations with forcing, according to his account. At first, OpenAI said "very little human input" was needed. As the conversation went on, a different picture emerged, according to Buckmaster: a whole team had worked on the problem, easier problems had been used as stepping stones, and massive compute was thrown at it. Buckmaster says the mention of forced Navier-Stokes suggested that OpenAI was pursuing the same unusual route he and Alpöge had chosen, one that he says almost nobody else was working on. He and Alpöge had put all their drafts throughout the project into OpenAI Codex sessions. When he asked whether OpenAI's model had been trained on or had access to those sessions, he says he was told the model did not look up user data. When he asked specifically about training, he says he received no answer. OpenAI developer Noam Brown, one of the company's top minds in model development, said during the Astra launch that OpenAI had been attempting the Millennium Problems but hadn't found a solution . He added that they hadn't put much compute toward the effort. That was in early August. Bubeck wanted to cut the Anthropic employee as co-author OpenAI made two proposals, according to Buckmaster. In the first, Buckmaster and Alpöge post their Euler result, and OpenAI posts its own the next day, with OpenAI declaring them the "closest humans to the problem." In the second, Buckmaster alone presents the Navier-Stokes result and acknowledges an internal OpenAI model. In both scenarios, Bubeck twice "asserted" that he wanted Alpöge removed from authorship. The reason, according to Buckmaster, is that it was "so annoying" that Alpöge works at Anthropic. Buckmaster rejected both proposals and said he'd go public if OpenAI published its result in the proposed form. The response, according to Buckmaster: "Why would you ruin your career?" When he replied that he's an academic, Bubeck allegedly said: "If you don't want me to be nice, then I don't have to be nice." Buckmaster reports that Bubeck later texted Alpöge separately, telling him: "I don't know if Tristan is being fully rational right now." Alpöge declined to engage. Buckmaster explicitly states he isn't accusing anyone. He hasn't seen OpenAI's proof and doesn't know whether their data was used. He's sharing the facts because, as he puts it, "the alternative is to let a sequence of announcements say something I know to be false What Buckmaster had actually wanted to talk about was something very different: that a mathematician working with a language model can now accomplish in a month what used to take much longer. "This is a Deep Blue-Kasparov moment ," he writes. OpenAI has not yet responded to the allegations. AI News Without the Hype – Curated by Humans Subscribe to THE DECODER for ad-free reading, a weekly AI newsletter, our exclusive "AI Radar" frontier report six times a year, full archive access, and access to our comment section. Subscribe now Source: Statement
관련 소식