I just pasted the url in 6.1 sol xhigh and it said it works.
postepowanieadm 1 day ago||
Discovered in whose data?
hbn 1 day ago||
All research is built off the existing body of all research data done by other people
einpoklum 1 day ago||
I would image it's the data the researchers fed the agents and in which a discovery was likely. Especially since it's "candidates", so it's not like a proper discovery.
Madmallard 20 hours ago||
correction: decades of human research is stolen and by happenstance sampled by users of LLM Opus 5.5
m3kw9 1 day ago||
if you read it fast, it almost made my heart beat real fast
vatsachak 1 day ago||
I could have gotten this in one prompt lmao
rfgplk 1 day ago|
This gave me the idea to actually create a full (QED accurate) atomic simulation software. Essentially would allow you to play around with things like this. At a glance my workstation _probably_ has enough compute to handle it. At least to fully simulate at least a few dozen atoms and compounds.
meindnoch 1 day ago|||
You should consider patenting this very much novel idea, my friend!
No worries, your workstation is more than enough to run accurate quantum simulations!
:)
dekhn 1 day ago|||
Are you serious? QED simulations are extremely expensive even for very small N.
quux 1 day ago||
Here we go again
poulpy123 1 day ago||
Lmao, anything goes
derin-picment 1 day ago||
[flagged]
lin7c 1 day ago|
The honest version of "agents discovered X" is usually a hybrid: the human defines the search space and the acceptance bar, and the agents do the dogged iteration a human won't — generating candidates, running the sims, reading outputs, ruling out dead ends. The simulation itself isn't the impressive part; the question is whether the agents can judge ambiguous intermediate results and decide what to try next without a human steering each loop. If that decision loop is genuinely closed, that's a real step. The discovery still needs lab confirmation before it means much.