x.com/ElliotGlazer/status/2098505701245214927
1 correction found
The OAI NYT announcement only claimed progress.
The announcement did not merely say there was 'progress.' Both the New York Times article and OpenAI’s own post said OpenAI had a solution to the Navier–Stokes Millennium Prize problem.
Full reasoning
This sentence misstates what the announcement said.
The New York Times article referred to here was headlined "OpenAI Says It Has Cracked One of Math’s ‘Millennium Problems’" and reported that "OpenAI said on Tuesday that its newest artificial intelligence technology had solved one of the 'Millennium Problems'". That is a claim of a solution, not just unspecified progress.
OpenAI’s own September 8, 2026 post was even more explicit. It said: "We’re sharing a solution to the Navier–Stokes existence and smoothness problem" and later: "This resolves the Navier–Stokes Millennium Prize problem". OpenAI also wrote that it was releasing a paper and formal proof.
So while OpenAI also discussed the result as evidence of broader AI progress, the announcement itself did not only claim progress; it explicitly claimed a solution/resolution of the problem.
2 sources
- OpenAI Says It Has Cracked One of Math's 'Millennium Problems' - The New York Times
OpenAI said on Tuesday that its newest artificial intelligence technology had solved one of the "Millennium Problems" ... The company announced that one of its latest models ... needed just 88 hours to solve what mathematicians call "the Navier-Stokes existence and smoothness problem."
- On the Navier–Stokes Millennium Prize Problem | OpenAI
We’re sharing a solution to the Navier–Stokes existence and smoothness problem, one of the Millennium Prize Problems ... This resolves the Navier–Stokes Millennium Prize problem by establishing statement "C" (and also "D") in the official Millennium Prize formulation.