Jump to content Toggle sidebar Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia Create account Personal tools OpenAI 44 languages Article Talk Read Edit View history
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Not to be confused with OpenAL. OpenAIOpenAI Logo.svg Pioneer Building, San Francisco (2019) -1.jpg Headquarters at the Pioneer Building in San Francisco Industry Artificial intelligence Founded December 11, 2015; 7 years ago Founders
Sam Altman Trevor Blackwell Greg Brockman Vicki Cheung Reid Hoffman Andrej Karpathy Durk Kingma Jessica Livingston Elon Musk John Schulman Ilya Sutskever Peter Thiel Pamela Vagata Wojciech Zaremba [1] Headquarters Pioneer Building, San Francisco, California, US[2][3] Key people Greg Brockman (chairman & president) Sam Altman (CEO) Ilya Sutskever (chief scientist) Products DALL-E GPT-3 OpenAI Five ChatGPT OpenAI Codex Number of employees 375 (as of January 2023)[4] Website openai.com Edit this at Wikidata OpenAI is an American artificial intelligence (AI) research laboratory consisting of the non-profit OpenAI Incorporated (OpenAI Inc.) and its for-profit subsidiary corporation OpenAI Limited Partnership (OpenAI LP). OpenAI conducts AI research to promote and develop friendly AI in a way that benefits all humanity. The organization was founded in San Francisco in 2015 by Sam Altman, Reid Hoffman, Jessica Livingston, Elon Musk, Ilya Sutskever, Peter Thiel and others,[5][6][7] who collectively pledged US$1 billion. Musk resigned from the board in 2018 but remained a donor. Microsoft provided OpenAI LP a $1 billion investment in 2019 and a second multi-year investment in January 2023, reported to be $10 billion.[8] History Non-profit beginnings In December 2015, Sam Altman, Elon Musk, Greg Brockman, Reid Hoffman, Jessica Livingston, Peter Thiel, Amazon Web Services (AWS), Infosys, and YC Research announced[9] the formation of OpenAI and pledged over $1 billion to the venture. The organization stated it would "freely collaborate" with other institutions and researchers by making its patents and research open to the public.[10][11] OpenAI is headquartered at the Pioneer Building in Mission District, San Francisco.[12][3] According to Wired, Brockman met with Yoshua Bengio, one of the "founding fathers" of the deep learning movement, and drew up a list of the "best researchers in the field".[13] Brockman was able to hire nine of them as the first employees in December 2015.[13] In 2016 OpenAI paid corporate-level (rather than nonprofit-level) salaries, but did not pay AI researchers salaries comparable to those of Facebook or Google.[13] (Microsoft's Peter Lee stated that the cost of a top AI researcher exceeds the cost of a top NFL quarterback prospect.[13]) Nevertheless, a Google employee stated that he was willing to leave Google for OpenAI "partly because of the very strong group of people and, to a very large extent, because of its mission."[13] Brockman stated that "the best thing that I could imagine doing was moving humanity closer to building real AI in a safe way."[13] OpenAI researcher Wojciech Zaremba stated that he turned down "borderline crazy" offers of two to three times his market value to join OpenAI instead.[13] In April 2016, OpenAI released a public beta of "OpenAI Gym", its platform for reinforcement learning research.[14] In December 2016, OpenAI released "Universe", a software platform for measuring and training an AI's general intelligence across the world's supply of games, websites, and other applications.[15][16][17][18] In 2017 OpenAI spent $7.9 million, or a quarter of its functional expenses, on cloud computing alone.[19] In comparison, DeepMind's total expenses in 2017 were $442 million. In summer 2018, simply training OpenAI's Dota 2 bots required renting 128,000 CPUs and 256 GPUs from Google for multiple weeks. In 2018, Musk resigned his board seat, citing "a potential future conflict (of interest)" with his role as CEO of Tesla due to Tesla's AI development for self-driving cars, but remained a donor.[20] Transition to for-profit In 2019, OpenAI transitioned from non-profit to "capped" for-profit, with the profit capped at 100 times any investment.[21] According to OpenAI, the capped-profit model allows OpenAI LP to legally attract investment from venture funds, and in addition, to grant employees stakes in the company, the goal being that they can say "I'm going to Open AI, but in the long term it's not going to be disadvantageous to us as a family."[22] Many top researchers work for Google Brain, DeepMind, or Facebook, which offer stock options that a nonprofit would be unable to.[23] Prior to the transition, public disclosure of the compensation of top employees at OpenAI was legally required.[24] The company then distributed equity to its employees and partnered with Microsoft and Matthew Brown Companies,[25] who announced an investment package of $1 billion into the company. OpenAI also announced its intention to commercially license its technologies.[26] OpenAI plans to spend the $1 billion "within five years, and possibly much faster".[27] Altman has stated that even a billion dollars may turn out to be insufficient, and that the lab may ultimately need "more capital than any non-profit has ever raised" to achieve artificial general intelligence.[28] The transition from a nonprofit to a capped-profit company was viewed with skepticism by Oren Etzioni of the nonprofit Allen Institute for AI, who agreed that wooing top researchers to a nonprofit is difficult, but stated "I disagree with the notion that a nonprofit can't compete" and pointed to successful low-budget projects by OpenAI and others. "If bigger and better funded was always better, then IBM would still be number one." The nonprofit, OpenAI Inc., is the sole controlling shareholder of OpenAI LP. OpenAI LP, despite being a for-profit company, retains a formal fiduciary responsibility to OpenAI Inc.'s nonprofit charter. A majority of OpenAI Inc.'s board is barred from having financial stakes in OpenAI LP.[22] In addition, minority members with a stake in OpenAI LP are barred from certain votes due to conflict of interest.[23] Some researchers have argued that OpenAI LP's switch to for-profit status is inconsistent with OpenAI's claims to be "democratizing" AI.[29] A journalist at Vice News wrote that "generally, we've never been able to rely on venture capitalists to better humanity".[30] After becoming for-profit In 2020, OpenAI announced GPT-3, a language model trained on large internet datasets. GPT-3 is aimed at natural language answering of questions, but it can also translate between languages and coherently generate improvised text. It also announced that an associated API, named simply "the API", would form the heart of its first commercial product.[31] In 2021, OpenAI introduced DALL-E, a deep learning model that can generate digital images from natural language descriptions.[32] In December 2022, OpenAI received widespread media coverage after launching a free preview of ChatGPT, its new AI chatbot based on GPT-3.5. According to OpenAI, the preview received over a million signups within the first five days.[33] According to anonymous sources cited by Reuters in December 2022, OpenAI was projecting $200 million revenue in 2023 and $1 billion revenue in 2024.[34] As of January 2023, OpenAI was in talks for funding that would value the company at $29 billion, double the value of the company in 2021.[35] On January 23, 2023, Microsoft announced a new multi-year, multi-billion dollar (reported to be $10 billion) investment in OpenAI.[36][37] Participants Key employees: CEO and co-founder:[38] Sam Altman, former president of the startup accelerator Y Combinator President and co-founder:[39] Greg Brockman, former CTO, 3rd employee of Stripe[40] Chief Scientist and co-founder: Ilya Sutskever, a former Google expert on machine learning[40] Chief Technology Officer:[39] Mira Murati, previously at Leap Motion and Tesla, Inc. Chief Operating Officer:[39] Brad Lightcap, previously at Y Combinator and JPMorgan Chase Board of the OpenAI nonprofit: Greg Brockman Ilya Sutskever Sam Altman Adam D'Angelo Reid Hoffman Will Hurd Tasha McCauley Helen Toner Shivon Zilis Individual investors:[40] Reid Hoffman, LinkedIn co-founder[41] Peter Thiel, PayPal co-founder[41] Jessica Livingston, a founding partner of Y Combinator Corporate investors: Microsoft[42] Khosla Ventures[43] Infosys[44] Motives Some scientists, such as Stephen Hawking and Stuart Russell, have articulated concerns that if advanced AI someday gains the ability to re-design itself at an ever-increasing rate, an unstoppable "intelligence explosion" could lead to human extinction. Musk characterizes AI as humanity's "biggest existential threat."[45] OpenAI's founders structured it as a non-profit so that they could focus its research on making positive long-term contributions to humanity.[11] Musk and Altman have stated they are partly motivated by concerns about AI safety and the existential risk from artificial general intelligence.[46][47] OpenAI states that "it's hard to fathom how much human-level AI could benefit society," and that it is equally difficult to comprehend "how much it could damage society if built or used incorrectly".[11] Research on safety cannot safely be postponed: "because of AI's surprising history, it's hard to predict when human-level AI might come within reach."[48] OpenAI states that AI "should be an extension of individual human wills and, in the spirit of liberty, as broadly and evenly distributed as possible...".[11] Co-chair Sam Altman expects the decades-long project to surpass human intelligence.[49] Vishal Sikka, former CEO of Infosys, stated that an "openness" where the endeavor would "produce results generally in the greater interest of humanity" was a fundamental requirement for his support, and that OpenAI "aligns very nicely with our long-held values" and their "endeavor to do purposeful work".[50] Cade Metz of Wired suggests that corporations such as Amazon may be motivated by a desire to use open-source software and data to level the playing field against corporations such as Google and Facebook that own enormous supplies of proprietary data. Altman states that Y Combinator companies will share their data with OpenAI.[49] Strategy Musk posed the question: "What is the best thing we can do to ensure the future is good? We could sit on the sidelines or we can encourage regulatory oversight, or we could participate with the right structure with people who care deeply about developing AI in a way that is safe and is beneficial to humanity." Musk acknowledged that "there is always some risk that in actually trying to advance (friendly) AI we may create the thing we are concerned about"; nonetheless, the best defense is "to empower as many people as possible to have AI. If everyone has AI powers, then there's not any one person or a small set of individuals who can have AI superpower."[40] Musk and Altman's counter-intuitive strategy of trying to reduce the risk that AI will cause overall harm, by giving AI to everyone, is controversial among those who are concerned with existential risk from artificial intelligence. Philosopher Nick Bostrom is skeptical of Musk's approach: "If you have a button that could do bad things to the world, you don't want to give it to everyone."[47] During a 2016 conversation about the technological singularity, Altman said that "we don't plan to release all of our source code" and mentioned a plan to "allow wide swaths of the world to elect representatives to a new governance board". Greg Brockman stated that "Our goal right now... is to do the best thing there is to do. It's a little vague."[51] Conversely, OpenAI's initial decision to withhold GPT-2 due to a wish to "err on the side of caution" in the presence of potential misuse, has been criticized by advocates of openness. Delip Rao, an expert in text generation, stated "I don't think [OpenAI] spent enough time proving [GPT-2] was actually dangerous." Other critics argued that open publication is necessary to replicate the research and to be able to come up with countermeasures.[52] Products and applications OpenAI's research tend to focus on reinforcement learning (RL). OpenAI is viewed as an important competitor to DeepMind.[53] Gym Gym aims to provide an easy to set up, general-intelligence benchmark with a wide variety of different environments—somewhat akin to, but broader than, the ImageNet Large Scale Visual Recognition Challenge used in supervised learning research—and that hopes to standardize the way in which environments are defined in AI research publications, so that published research becomes more easily reproducible.[14][54] The project claims to provide the user with a simple interface. As of June 2017, Gym can only be used with Python.[55] As of September 2017, the Gym documentation site was not maintained, and active work focused instead on its GitHub page.[56][non-primary source needed] RoboSumo In "RoboSumo", virtual humanoid "metalearning" robots initially lack knowledge of how to even walk, and are given the goals of learning to move around, and pushing the opposing agent out of the ring. Through this adversarial learning process, the agents learn how to adapt to changing conditions; when an agent is then removed from this virtual environment and placed in a new virtual environment with high winds, the agent braces to remain upright, suggesting it had learned how to balance in a generalized way.[57][58] OpenAI's Igor Mordatch argues that competition between agents can create an intelligence "arms race" that can increase an agent's ability to function, even outside the context of the competition. Debate Game In 2018, OpenAI launched the Debate Game, which teaches machines to debate toy problems in front of a human judge. The purpose is to research whether such an approach may assist in auditing AI decisions and in developing explainable AI.[59][60] Dactyl Dactyl uses machine learning to train a Shadow Hand, a human-like robot hand, to manipulate physical objects. It learns entirely in simulation using the same RL algorithms and training code as OpenAI Five. OpenAI tackled the object orientation problem by using domain randomization, a simulation approach which exposes the learner to a variety of experiences rather than trying to fit to reality. The set-up for Dactyl, aside from having motion tracking cameras, also has RGB cameras to allow the robot to manipulate an arbitrary object by seeing it. In 2018, OpenAI showed that the system was able to manipulate a cube and an octagonal prism.[61] In 2019, OpenAI demonstrated that Dactyl could solve a Rubik's Cube. The robot was able to solve the puzzle 60% of the time. Objects like the Rubik's Cube introduce complex physics that is harder to model. OpenAI solved this by improving the robustness of Dactyl to perturbations; they employed a technique called Automatic Domain Randomization (ADR), a simulation approach where progressively more difficult environments are endlessly generated. ADR differs from manual domain randomization by not needing there to be a human to specify randomization ranges.[62] Generative models GPT The GPT model The original paper on generative pre-training (GPT) of a language model was written by Alec Radford and his colleagues, and published in preprint on OpenAI's website on June 11, 2018.[63] It showed how a generative model of language is able to acquire world knowledge and process long-range dependencies by pre-training on a diverse corpus with long stretches of contiguous text. GPT-2 Main article: GPT-2 An instance of GPT-2 writing a paragraph based on a prompt from its own Wikipedia article in February 2021 Generative Pre-trained Transformer 2, commonly known by its abbreviated form GPT-2, is an unsupervised transformer language model and the successor to GPT. GPT-2 was first announced in February 2019, with only limited demonstrative versions initially released to the public. The full version of GPT-2 was not immediately released out of concern over potential misuse, including applications for writing fake news.[64] Some experts expressed skepticism that GPT-2 posed a significant threat. The Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence responded to GPT-2 with a tool to detect "neural fake news".[65] Other researchers, such as Jeremy Howard, warned of "the technology to totally fill Twitter, email, and the web up with reasonable-sounding, context-appropriate prose, which would drown out all other speech and be impossible to filter".[66] In November 2019, OpenAI released the complete version of the GPT-2 language model.[67] Several websites host interactive demonstrations of different instances of GPT-2 and other transformer models.[68][69][70] GPT-2's authors argue unsupervised language models to be general-purpose learners, illustrated by GPT-2 achieving state-of-the-art accuracy and perplexity on 7 of 8 zero-shot tasks (i.e. the model was not further trained on any task-specific input-output examples). The corpus it was trained on, called WebText, contains slightly over 8 million documents for a total of 40 GB of text from URLs shared in Reddit submissions with at least 3 upvotes. It avoids certain issues encoding vocabulary with word tokens by using byte pair encoding. This allows to represent any string of characters by encoding both individual characters and multiple-character tokens.[71] GPT-3 Main article: GPT-3 Generative Pre-trained[a] Transformer 3, commonly known by its abbreviated form GPT-3, is an unsupervised transformer language model and the successor to GPT-2. It was first described in May 2020.[73][74][75] OpenAI stated that full version of GPT-3 contains 175 billion parameters,[75] two orders of magnitude larger than the 1.5 billion parameters[76] in the full version of GPT-2 (although GPT-3 models with as few as 125 million parameters were also trained).[77] OpenAI stated that GPT-3 succeeds at certain "meta-learning" tasks. It can generalize the purpose of a single input-output pair. The paper gives an example of translation and cross-linguistic transfer learning between English and Romanian, and between English and German.[75] GPT-3 dramatically improved benchmark results over GPT-2. OpenAI cautioned that such scaling up of language models could be approaching or encountering the fundamental capability limitations of predictive language models.[78] Pre-training GPT-3 required several thousand petaflop/s-days[b] of compute, compared to tens of petaflop/s-days for the full GPT-2 model.[75] Like that of its predecessor,[64] GPT-3's fully trained model was not immediately released to the public on the grounds of possible abuse, though OpenAI planned to allow access through a paid cloud API after a two-month free private beta that began in June 2020.[80][81] On September 23, 2020, GPT-3 was licensed exclusively to Microsoft.[82][83] ChatGPT Main article: ChatGPT ChatGPT is an artificial intelligence tool that provides a conversational interface that allows you to ask questions in natural language. The system then responds with an answer within seconds. ChatGPT was launched in November 2022 and reached 1 million users only 5 days after its initial launch.[84] Music OpenAI's MuseNet (2019) is a deep neural net trained to predict subsequent musical notes in MIDI music files. It can generate songs with ten different instruments in fifteen different styles. According to The Verge, a song generated by MuseNet tends to start reasonably but then fall into chaos the longer it plays.[85][86] In pop culture, initial applications of this tool were utilized as early as 2020 for the internet psychological thriller Ben Drowned to create music for the titular character. [87][88] OpenAI's Jukebox (2020) is an open-sourced algorithm to generate music with vocals. After training on 1.2 million samples, the system accepts a genre, artist, and a snippet of lyrics and outputs song samples. OpenAI stated the songs "show local musical coherence, follow traditional chord patterns" but acknowledged that the songs lack "familiar larger musical structures such as choruses that repeat" and that "there is a significant gap" between Jukebox and human-generated music. The Verge stated "It's technologically impressive, even if the results sound like mushy versions of songs that might feel familiar", while Business Insider stated "surprisingly, some of the resulting songs are catchy and sound legitimate".[89][90][91] Whisper Whisper is a general-purpose speech recognition model. It is trained on a large dataset of diverse audio and is also a multi-task model that can perform multilingual speech recognition as well as speech translation and language identification.[92] API In June 2020, OpenAI announced a multi-purpose API which it said was "for accessing new AI models developed by OpenAI" to let developers call on it for "any English language AI task."[80][93] DALL-E and CLIP Main article: DALL-E Images produced by DALL-E when given the text prompt "a professional high-quality illustration of a giraffe dragon chimera. a giraffe imitating a dragon. a giraffe made of dragon." DALL-E is a Transformer model that creates images from textual descriptions, revealed by OpenAI in January 2021.[94] CLIP does the opposite: it creates a description for a given image.[95] DALL-E uses a 12-billion-parameter version of GPT-3 to interpret natural language inputs (such as "a green leather purse shaped like a pentagon" or "an isometric view of a sad capybara") and generate corresponding images. It can create images of realistic objects ("a stained-glass window with an image of a blue strawberry") as well as objects that do not exist in reality ("a cube with the texture of a porcupine"). As of March 2021, no API or code is available. In March 2021, OpenAI released a paper titled Multimodal Neurons in Artificial Neural Networks,[96] where they showed a detailed analysis of CLIP (and GPT) models and their vulnerabilities. The new type of attacks on such models was described in this work. We refer to these attacks as typographic attacks. We believe attacks such as those described above are far from simply an academic concern. By exploiting the model's ability to read text robustly, we find that even photographs of hand-written text can often fool the model. — Multimodal Neurons in Artificial Neural Networks, OpenAI In April 2022, OpenAI announced DALL-E 2, an updated version of the model with more realistic results.[97] In December 2022, OpenAI published on GitHub software for Point-E, a new rudimentary system for converting a text description into a 3-dimensional model.[98] Microscope OpenAI Microscope[99] is a collection of visualizations of every significant layer and neuron of eight different neural network models which are often studied in interpretability. Microscope was created to analyze the features that form inside these neural networks easily. The models included are AlexNet, VGG 19, different versions of Inception, and different versions of CLIP Resnet.[100] Codex Main article: OpenAI Codex OpenAI Codex is a descendant of GPT-3 that has additionally been trained on code from 54 million GitHub repositories.[101][102] It was announced in mid-2021 as the AI powering the code autocompletion tool GitHub Copilot.[102] In August 2021, an API was released in private beta.[103] According to OpenAI, the model is able to create working code in over a dozen programming languages, most effectively in Python.[101] Several issues with glitches, design flaws, and security vulnerabilities have been brought up.[104][105] Video game bots and benchmarks OpenAI Five Main article: OpenAI Five OpenAI Five is the name of a team of five OpenAI-curated bots that are used in the competitive five-on-five video game Dota 2, who learn to play against human players at a high skill level entirely through trial-and-error algorithms. Before becoming a team of five, the first public demonstration occurred at The International 2017, the annual premiere championship tournament for the game, where Dendi, a professional Ukrainian player, lost against a bot in a live 1v1 matchup.[106][107] After the match, CTO Greg Brockman explained that the bot had learned by playing against itself for two weeks of real time, and that the learning software was a step in the direction of creating software that can handle complex tasks like a surgeon.[108][109] The system uses a form of reinforcement learning, as the bots learn over time by playing against themselves hundreds of times a day for months, and are rewarded for actions such as killing an enemy and taking map objectives.[110][111][112] By June 2018, the ability of the bots expanded to play together as a full team of five, and they were able to defeat teams of amateur and semi-professional players.[113][110][114][115] At The International 2018, OpenAI Five played in two exhibition matches against professional players, but ended up losing both games.[116][117][118] In April 2019, OpenAI Five defeated OG, the reigning world champions of the game at the time, 2:0 in a live exhibition match in San Francisco.[119][120] The bots' final public appearance came later that month, where they played in 42,729 total games in a four-day open online competition, winning 99.4% of those games.[121] GYM Retro Gym Retro is a platform for RL research on video games. Gym Retro is used to research RL algorithms and study generalization. Prior research in RL has focused chiefly on optimizing agents to solve single tasks. Gym Retro gives the ability to generalize between games with similar concepts but different appearances. See also DeepMind Future of Humanity Institute Future of Life Institute Machine Intelligence Research Institute Notes The term "pre-training" refers to general language training as distinct from fine-tuning for specific tasks.[72] One petaflop/s-day is approximately equal to 1020 neural net operations.[79] References "Introducing OpenAI". OpenAI. December 12, 2015. Archived from the original on August 8, 2017. Retrieved January 27, 2023. Markoff, John (December 11, 2015). "Artificial-Intelligence Research Center Is Founded by Silicon Valley Investors". The New York Times. Archived from the original on August 30, 2020. Retrieved December 12, 2015. Hao, Karen (February 17, 2020). "The messy, secretive reality behind OpenAI's bid to save the world". MIT Technology Review. Archived from the original on April 3, 2020. Retrieved March 9, 2020. "Microsoft fires 10,000, invests $10bn in 375-person OpenAI". The Stack. January 23, 2023. Retrieved January 24, 2023. "SAM ALTMAN ON HIS PLAN TO KEEP A.I. OUT OF THE HANDS OF THE "BAD GUYS". Vanity Fair. 2015. "Introducing OpenAI". OpenAI. December 12, 2015. Archived from the original on August 8, 2017. Retrieved January 27, 2023. "OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT: What all it does, how it started and more". The Times of India. January 25, 2023. Retrieved January 28, 2023. Browne, Ryan. "Microsoft reportedly plans to invest $10 billion in creator of buzzy A.I. tool ChatGPT". CNBC. Retrieved January 27, 2023. "Introducing OpenAI". OpenAI. December 12, 2015. Archived from the original on August 8, 2017. Retrieved December 23, 2022. "Introducing OpenAI". OpenAI Blog. December 12, 2015. Archived from the original on February 24, 2019. Retrieved September 29, 2018. "Tech giants pledge $1bn for 'altruistic AI' venture, OpenAI". BBC News. December 12, 2015. Archived from the original on March 14, 2018. Retrieved December 19, 2015. Conger, Kate. "Elon Musk's Neuralink Sought to Open an Animal Testing Facility in San Francisco". Gizmodo. Archived from the original on September 24, 2018. Retrieved October 11, 2018. Cade Metz (April 27, 2016). "Inside OpenAI, Elon Musk's Wild Plan to Set Artificial Intelligence Free". Wired. Archived from the original on April 27, 2016. Retrieved April 28, 2016. Dave Gershgorn (April 27, 2016). "Elon Musk's Artificial Intelligence Group Opens A 'Gym' To Train A.I." Popular Science. Archived from the original on April 30, 2016. Retrieved April 29, 2016. Metz, Cade. "Elon Musk's Lab Wants to Teach Computers to Use Apps Just Like Humans Do". WIRED. Archived from the original on January 13, 2019. Retrieved December 31, 2016. Mannes, John. "OpenAI's Universe is the fun parent every artificial intelligence deserves". TechCrunch. Archived from the original on February 19, 2019. Retrieved December 31, 2016. "OpenAI – Universe". Archived from the original on January 1, 2017. Retrieved December 31, 2016. Claburn, Thomas. "Elon Musk-backed OpenAI reveals Universe – a universal training ground for computers". The Register. Archived from the original on January 1, 2017. Retrieved December 31, 2016. "Microsoft to invest $1 billion in OpenAI". Reuters. July 22, 2019. Archived from the original on May 25, 2020. Retrieved March 6, 2020. Vincent, James (February 21, 2018). "Elon Musk leaves board of AI safety group to avoid conflict of interest with Tesla". The Verge. Archived from the original on November 9, 2020. Retrieved February 22, 2018. "OpenAI shifts from nonprofit to 'capped-profit' to attract capital". March 11, 2019. Archived from the original on January 4, 2023. Retrieved January 4, 2023. "To Compete With Google, OpenAI Seeks Investors–and Profits". Wired. December 3, 2019. Archived from the original on March 14, 2020. Retrieved March 6, 2020. Kahn, Jeremy (March 11, 2019). "AI Research Group Co-Founded by Elon Musk Starts For-Profit Arm". Bloomberg News. Archived from the original on December 7, 2019. Retrieved March 6, 2020. Metz, Cade (April 19, 2018). "A.I. Researchers Are Making More Than $1 Million, Even at a Nonprofit". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on August 8, 2018. Retrieved January 28, 2023. "Who owns ChatGPT". December 29, 2022. Archived from the original on January 24, 2023. Retrieved January 4, 2023. "Microsoft Invests in and Partners with OpenAI to Support Us Building Beneficial AGI". OpenAI. July 22, 2019. Archived from the original on November 7, 2020. Retrieved February 21, 2020. Murgia, Madhumita (August 7, 2019). "DeepMind runs up higher losses and debts in race for AI". Financial Times. Archived from the original on December 26, 2019. Retrieved March 6, 2020. "OpenAI Will Need More Capital Than Any Non-Profit Has Ever Raised". Fortune. Archived from the original on December 8, 2019. Retrieved March 6, 2020. Vincent, James (July 22, 2019). "Microsoft invests $1 billion in OpenAI to pursue holy grail of artificial intelligence". The Verge. Archived from the original on July 23, 2019. Retrieved March 6, 2020. Haskins, Caroline (March 12, 2019). "OpenAI's Mission to Benefit Humanity Now Includes Seeking Profit". Vice News. Archived from the original on September 20, 2019. Retrieved March 6, 2020. Vance, Ashlee (June 11, 2020). "Trillions of Words Analyzed, OpenAI Sets Loose AI Language Colossus". Bloomberg News. Archived from the original on October 13, 2020. Retrieved June 12, 2020. "OpenAI debuts DALL-E for generating images from text". VentureBeat. January 5, 2021. Archived from the original on January 5, 2021. Retrieved January 5, 2021. Roose, Kevin (December 5, 2022). "The Brilliance and Weirdness of ChatGPT". The New York Times. Archived from the original on January 18, 2023. Retrieved January 5, 2023. Dastin, Jeffrey; Hu, Krystal; Dave, Paresh; Dave, Paresh (December 15, 2022). "Exclusive: ChatGPT owner OpenAI projects $1 billion in revenue by 2024". Reuters. Retrieved January 5, 2023. Kruppa, Berber Jin and Miles. "WSJ News Exclusive | ChatGPT Creator in Investor Talks at $29 Billion Valuation". WSJ. Retrieved January 6, 2023. "Microsoft Adds $10 Billion to Investment in ChatGPT Maker OpenAI". Bloomberg.com. January 23, 2023. Archived from the original on January 23, 2023. Retrieved January 23, 2023. Capoot, Ashley. "Microsoft announces multibillion-dollar investment in ChatGPT-maker OpenAI". CNBC. Archived from the original on January 23, 2023. Retrieved January 23, 2023. Bass, Dina (July 22, 2019). "Microsoft to invest $1 billion in OpenAI". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on July 22, 2019. Retrieved July 22, 2019. Bordoloi, Pritam (May 9, 2022). "OpenAI gets a new president, CTO & COO in the latest rejig". AIM. Archived from the original on October 16, 2022. Retrieved October 11, 2022. "Silicon Valley investors to bankroll artificial-intelligence center". The Seattle Times. December 13, 2015. Archived from the original on January 5, 2016. Retrieved December 19, 2015. Liedtke, Michael. "Elon Musk, Peter Thiel, Reid Hoffman, others back $1 billion OpenAI research center". Mercury News. Archived from the original on December 22, 2015. Retrieved December 19, 2015. Vincent, James (July 22, 2019). "Microsoft invests $1 billion in OpenAI to pursue holy grail of artificial intelligence". The Verge. Archived from the original on July 23, 2019. Retrieved July 23, 2019. "About OpenAI". OpenAI. December 11, 2015. Archived from the original on December 22, 2017. Retrieved December 23, 2022. "Elon Musk, Infosys, others back OpenAI with $1 bn". Business Standard India. Indo-Asian News Service. December 12, 2015. Archived from the original on August 30, 2019. Retrieved August 30, 2019. Piper, Kelsey (November 2, 2018). "Why Elon Musk fears artificial intelligence". Vox. Archived from the original on April 23, 2021. Retrieved March 10, 2021. Lewontin, Max (December 14, 2015). "Open AI: Effort to democratize artificial intelligence research?". The Christian Science Monitor. Archived from the original on December 19, 2015. Retrieved December 19, 2015. Cade Metz (April 27, 2016). "Inside OpenAI, Elon Musk's Wild Plan to Set Artificial Intelligence Free". Wired. Archived from the original on April 27, 2016. Retrieved April 28, 2016. Mendoza, Jessica. "Tech leaders launch nonprofit to save the world from killer robots". The Christian Science Monitor. Archived from the original on July 3, 2018. Retrieved December 19, 2015. Metz, Cade (December 15, 2015). "Elon Musk's Billion-Dollar AI Plan Is About Far More Than Saving the World". Wired. Archived from the original on December 19, 2015. Retrieved December 19, 2015. "Altman said they expect this decades-long project to surpass human intelligence." Vishal Sikka (December 14, 2015). "OpenAI: AI for All". InfyTalk. Infosys. Archived from the original on December 22, 2015. Retrieved December 22, 2015. "Sam Altman's Manifest Destiny". The New Yorker. No. October 10, 2016. Archived from the original on October 4, 2016. Retrieved October 4, 2016. Vincent, James (February 21, 2019). "AI researchers debate the ethics of sharing potentially harmful programs". The Verge. Archived from the original on February 9, 2021. Retrieved March 6, 2020. Lee, Dave (October 15, 2019). "Robot solves Rubik's cube, but not grand challenge". BBC News. Archived from the original on April 3, 2020. Retrieved February 29, 2020. Greg Brockman; John Schulman (April 27, 2016). "OpenAI Gym Beta". OpenAI Blog. OpenAI. Archived from the original on February 26, 2019. Retrieved April 29, 2016. "OpenAI Gym". GitHub. Archived from the original on January 28, 2019. Retrieved May 8, 2017. Brockman, Greg (September 12, 2017). "Yep, the Github repo has been the focus of the project for the past year. The Gym site looks cool but hasn't been maintained". @gdb. Archived from the original on September 13, 2017. Retrieved November 7, 2017. "AI Sumo Wrestlers Could Make Future Robots More Nimble". Wired. October 11, 2017. Archived from the original on November 7, 2017. Retrieved November 2, 2017. "OpenAI's Goofy Sumo-Wrestling Bots Are Smarter Than They Look". MIT Technology Review. Archived from the original on November 9, 2018. Retrieved November 2, 2017. Greene, Tristan (May 4, 2018). "OpenAI's Debate Game teaches you and your friends how to lie like robots". The Next Web. Archived from the original on May 5, 2018. Retrieved May 31, 2018. "Why Scientists Think AI Systems Should Debate Each Other". Fast Company. May 8, 2018. Archived from the original on May 19, 2018. Retrieved June 2, 2018. OpenAI; Andrychowicz, Marcin; Baker, Bowen; Chociej, Maciek; Józefowicz, Rafał; McGrew, Bob; Pachocki, Jakub; Petron, Arthur; Plappert, Matthias; Powell, Glenn; Ray, Alex; Schneider, Jonas; Sidor, Szymon; Tobin, Josh; Welinder, Peter; Weng, Lilian; Zaremba, Wojciech (2019). "Learning Dexterous In-Hand Manipulation". arXiv:1808.00177v5 [cs.LG]. OpenAI; Akkaya, Ilge; Andrychowicz, Marcin; Chociej, Maciek; Litwin, Mateusz; McGrew, Bob; Petron, Arthur; Paino, Alex; Plappert, Matthias; Powell, Glenn; Ribas, Raphael (2019). "Solving Rubik's Cube with a Robot Hand". arXiv:1910.07113v1 [cs.LG]. "Improving Language Understanding by Generative Pre-Training" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on January 26, 2021. Retrieved June 9, 2020. Hern, Alex (February 14, 2019). "New AI fake text generator may be too dangerous to release, say creators". The Guardian. Archived from the original on February 14, 2019. Retrieved February 14, 2019. Schwartz, Oscar (July 4, 2019). "Could 'fake text' be the next global political threat?". The Guardian. Archived from the original on July 16, 2019. Retrieved July 16, 2019. Vincent, James (February 14, 2019). "OpenAI's new multitalented AI writes, translates, and slanders". The Verge. Archived from the original on December 18, 2020. Retrieved July 16, 2019. "GPT-2: 1.5B Release". OpenAI. November 5, 2019. Archived from the original on November 14, 2019. Retrieved November 14, 2019. "Write With Transformer". Archived from the original on December 4, 2019. Retrieved December 4, 2019. "Talk to Transformer". Archived from the original on December 4, 2019. Retrieved December 4, 2019. "CreativeEngines". Retrieved June 25, 2021. "Language Models are Unsupervised Multitask Learners" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on December 12, 2019. Retrieved December 4, 2019. Ganesh, Prakhar (December 17, 2019). "Pre-trained Language Models: Simplified". Retrieved September 9, 2020. "The intuition behind pre-trained language models is to create a black box which understands the language and can then be asked to do any specific task in that language." "openai/gpt-3". OpenAI. May 29, 2020. Archived from the original on November 14, 2020. Retrieved May 29, 2020. Sagar, Ram (June 3, 2020). "OpenAI Releases GPT-3, The Largest Model So Far". Analytics India Magazine. Archived from the original on August 4, 2020. Retrieved June 14, 2020. Brown, Tom; Mann, Benjamin; Ryder, Nick; Subbiah, Melanie; Kaplan, Jared; Dhariwal, Prafulla; Neelakantan, Arvind; Shyam, Pranav; Sastry, Girish; Askell, Amanda; Agarwal, Sandhini (June 1, 2020). "Language Models are Few-Shot Learners". p. appendix. arXiv:2005.14165 [cs.CL]. "Language Models are Unsupervised Multitask Learners" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on December 12, 2019. Retrieved December 4, 2019. "GPT-2, is a 1.5B parameter Transformer" Brown, Tom; Mann, Benjamin; Ryder, Nick; Subbiah, Melanie; Kaplan, Jared; Dhariwal, Prafulla; Neelakantan, Arvind; Shyam, Pranav; Sastry, Girish; Askell, Amanda; Agarwal, Sandhini (June 1, 2020). "Language Models are Few-Shot Learners". arXiv:2005.14165 [cs.CL]. "Since we increase the capacity by over two orders of magnitude from GPT-2 to GPT-3" Ray, Tiernan (2020). "OpenAI's gigantic GPT-3 hints at the limits of language models for AI". ZDNet. Archived from the original on June 1, 2020. Retrieved June 5, 2020. Amodei, Dario; Hernandez, Danny (May 16, 2018). "AI and Compute". Archived from the original on June 17, 2020. Retrieved August 30, 2020. "A petaflop/s-day (pfs-day) consists of performing 1015 neural net operations per second for one day, or a total of about 1020 operations. The compute-time product serves as a mental convenience, similar to kW-hr for energy." "OpenAI API". OpenAI. June 11, 2020. Archived from the original on June 11, 2020. Retrieved June 14, 2020. "Why did OpenAI choose to release an API instead of open-sourcing the models? There are three main reasons we did this. First, commercializing the technology helps us pay for our ongoing AI research, safety, and policy efforts. Second, many of the models underlying the API are very large, taking a lot of expertise to develop and deploy and making them very expensive to run. This makes it hard for anyone except larger companies to benefit from the underlying technology. We're hopeful that the API will make powerful AI systems more accessible to smaller businesses and organizations. Third, the API model allows us to more easily respond to misuse of the technology. Since it is hard to predict the downstream use cases of our models, it feels inherently safer to release them via an API and broaden access over time, rather than release an open source model where access cannot be adjusted if it turns out to have harmful applications." Eadicicco, Lisa. "The artificial intelligence company that Elon Musk helped found is now selling the text-generation software it previously said was too dangerous to launch". Business Insider. Archived from the original on November 14, 2020. Retrieved July 6, 2020. "OpenAI is giving Microsoft exclusive access to its GPT-3 language model". MIT Technology Review. Archived from the original on February 5, 2021. Retrieved September 24, 2020. "Microsoft gets exclusive license for OpenAI's GPT-3 language model". VentureBeat. September 22, 2020. Archived from the original on November 8, 2020. Retrieved September 24, 2020. "Mira Murati via Twitter". Mira Murati. December 5, 2022. Archived from the original on December 14, 2022. Retrieved December 15, 2022. "OpenAI's MuseNet generates AI music at the push of a button". The Verge. April 2019. Archived from the original on June 28, 2019. Retrieved June 8, 2020. "MuseNet". OpenAI. April 25, 2019. Archived from the original on June 13, 2020. Retrieved June 8, 2020. https://www.arcadeattack.co.uk/podcast-september-4-2020/ https://mobile.twitter.com/alexanderdhall/status/1276186528264392707 "OpenAI introduces Jukebox, a new AI model that generates genre-specific music". The Verge. April 30, 2020. Archived from the original on June 8, 2020. Retrieved June 8, 2020. Stephen, Bijan (April 30, 2020). "OpenAI introduces Jukebox, a new AI model that generates genre-specific music". Business Insider. Archived from the original on June 8, 2020. Retrieved June 8, 2020. "Jukebox". OpenAI. April 30, 2020. Archived from the original on June 8, 2020. Retrieved June 8, 2020. Radford, Alec; Kim, Jong Wook; Xu, Tao; Brockman, Greg; McLeavey, Christine; Sutskever, Ilya (2022). "Robust Speech Recognition via Large-Scale Weak Supervision". arXiv:2212.04356. Retrieved January 9, 2023. "TechCrunch Startup and Technology News". TechCrunch. June 11, 2020. Archived from the original on June 12, 2020. Retrieved June 11, 2020. "If you've ever wanted to try out OpenAI's vaunted machine learning toolset, it just got a lot easier. The company has released an API that lets developers call its AI tools in on "virtually any English language task."" "DALL·E: Creating Images from Text". January 5, 2021. Archived from the original on March 27, 2021. Retrieved March 27, 2021. "CLIP: Connecting Text and Images". January 5, 2021. Archived from the original on March 25, 2021. Retrieved March 27, 2021. "Multimodal Neurons in Artificial Neural Networks". March 4, 2021. "DALL·E 2". OpenAI. Archived from the original on April 6, 2022. Retrieved April 6, 2022. "ChatGPT: A scientist explains the hidden genius and pitfalls of OpenAI's chatbot". BBC Science Focus Magazine. 2022. Retrieved December 30, 2022. "OpenAI Microscope". April 14, 2020. "OpenAI Microscope". OpenAI Microscope. Alford, Anthony (August 31, 2021). "OpenAI Announces 12 Billion Parameter Code-Generation AI Codex". InfoQ. Archived from the original on July 9, 2022. Retrieved September 3, 2021. Wiggers, Kyle (July 8, 2021). "OpenAI warns AI behind GitHub's Copilot may be susceptible to bias". VentureBeat. Retrieved September 3, 2021. Zaremba, Wojciech (August 10, 2021). "OpenAI Codex". OpenAI. Retrieved September 3, 2021. Dickson, Ben (August 16, 2021). "What to expect from OpenAI's Codex API". VentureBeat. Retrieved September 3, 2021. Claburn, Thomas (August 25, 2021). "GitHub's Copilot may steer you into dangerous waters about 40% of the time – study". The Register. Retrieved September 3, 2021. Savov, Vlad (August 14, 2017). "My favorite game has been invaded by killer AI bots and Elon Musk hype". The Verge. Archived from the original on June 26, 2018. Retrieved June 25, 2018. Frank, Blair Hanley. "OpenAI's bot beats top Dota 2 player so badly that he quits". Venture Beat. Archived from the original on August 12, 2017. Retrieved August 12, 2017. "Dota 2". blog.openai.com. August 11, 2017. Archived from the original on August 11, 2017. Retrieved August 12, 2017. "More on Dota 2". blog.openai.com. August 16, 2017. Archived from the original on February 23, 2019. Retrieved August 16, 2017. Simonite, Tom. "Can Bots Outwit Humans in One of the Biggest Esports Games?". Wired. Archived from the original on June 25, 2018. Retrieved June 25, 2018. Kahn, Jeremy (June 25, 2018). "A Bot Backed by Elon Musk Has Made an AI Breakthrough in Video Game World". Bloomberg.com. Bloomberg L.P. Archived from the original on June 27, 2018. Retrieved June 27, 2018. Clifford, Catherine (June 28, 2018). "Bill Gates says gamer bots from Elon Musk-backed nonprofit are 'huge milestone' in A.I." CNBC. Archived from the original on June 28, 2018. Retrieved June 29, 2018. "OpenAI Five Benchmark". blog.openai.com. July 18, 2018. Archived from the original on February 13, 2019. Retrieved August 25, 2018. Vincent, James (June 25, 2018). "AI bots trained for 180 years a day to beat humans at Dota 2". The Verge. Archived from the original on June 25, 2018. Retrieved June 25, 2018. Savov, Vlad (August 6, 2018). "The OpenAI Dota 2 bots just defeated a team of former pros". The Verge. Archived from the original on August 7, 2018. Retrieved August 7, 2018. Simonite, Tom. "Pro Gamers Fend off Elon Musk-Backed AI Bots—for Now". Wired. Archived from the original on August 24, 2018. Retrieved August 25, 2018. Quach, Katyanna. "Game over, machines: Humans defeat OpenAI bots once again at video games Olympics". The Register. Archived from the original on August 25, 2018. Retrieved August 25, 2018. "The International 2018: Results". blog.openai.com. August 24, 2018. Archived from the original on August 24, 2018. Retrieved August 25, 2018. Statt, Nick (April 13, 2019). "OpenAI's Dota 2 AI steamrolls world champion e-sports team with back-to-back victories". The Verge. Archived from the original on April 15, 2019. Retrieved July 20, 2019. "How to Train Your OpenAI Five". OpenAI Blog. April 15, 2019. Archived from the original on June 30, 2019. Retrieved July 20, 2019. Wiggers, Kyle (April 22, 2019). "OpenAI's Dota 2 bot defeated 99.4% of players in public matches". Venture Beat. Archived from the original on July 11, 2019. Retrieved April 22, 2019. External links Official website Edit this at Wikidata v t e Differentiable computing v t e Existential risk from artificial intelligence v t e Elon Musk Portals: Companies flag California Authority control Edit this at Wikidata Coordinates: 37.7623°N 122.4148°W Categories: OpenAI 2015 establishments in California 2015 in San Francisco 501(c)(3) organizations American companies established in 2015 Artificial intelligence associations Artificial intelligence laboratories Elon Musk Existential risk from artificial general intelligence Existential risk organizations Non-profit organizations based in San Francisco Open-source artificial intelligence Research institutes in the San Francisco Bay Area This page was last edited on 2 February 2023, at 18:05 (UTC). Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 3.0; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization. Privacy policy About Wikipedia Disclaimers Contact Wikipedia Mobile view Developers Statistics Cookie statement Wikimedia Foundation Powered by MediaWiki Jump to content Toggle sidebar Wikipedia The Free Encyclopedia Create account Personal tools Talk:OpenAI Article Talk Read View source View history Page semi-protected
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the OpenAI article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL This page is not a forum for general discussion about OpenAI. Any such comments may be removed or refactored. Please limit discussion to improvement of this article. You may wish to ask factual questions about OpenAI at the Reference desk. WikiProject Council This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects: WikiProject Companies (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance) WikiProject California / San Francisco Bay Area (Rated Start-class, Low-importance) WikiProject Computing (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance) WikiProject Computer science (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance) WikiProject Organizations (Rated Start-class, Mid-importance) WikiProject Effective Altruism (Rated B-class, Mid-importance) WikiProject Open (Inactive) location seems to be based in sfbay area.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 06:10, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply] Done. Thanks, Gap9551 (talk) 17:49, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply] thanks i couldnt find a ref, you did.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 19:22, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply] See also itis many articles like this have too many "see also"s. we shouldnt just place every related article here. it should be lists that include this article, and article directly related that have not been able to fit well into the actual article. other institutes should NOT be listed, but should be in the body of the article as reliable sources themselves make the link or connection. its more a style point, too many see alsos means we are doing the research for the reader on whats interesting to them. we could put a see also for "luddites" for people who read this and say "hell no i hate this", or a link to brain development articles, history of computing, other think tanks in the bay area, cool AI projects like Watson, the Singularity, roger penrose who says we cant develop AI, and the movie AI. the list goes on and on.Mercurywoodrose (talk) 19:30, 12 December 2015 (UTC)[reply] I agree. I added just one originally, about the topic Existential risk from advanced artificial intelligence that closely matches the aims of the company. There are several institutes with similar goals, but they can also be found in Category:Existential risk organizations. I removed Allen Institute for Artificial Intelligence for starters, as they seem not be specifically aiming to reduce risks associated with AI, just to develop advanced AI in general. Gap9551 (talk) 00:47, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply] the field and the company This article is supposed to be about the company, not AIin general, but I see in the article a great deal of general discussion about the future prospects for AI. It doesn't belong here. DGG ( talk ) 22:33, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply] DGG I originally added the content because the mainstream media coverage of OpenAI talks in great detail about the donors' motivating beliefs about the future prospects for AI. I know you're a busy admin; maybe you didn't have time to read the sources? Do you want to discuss this and the "promotional" tag some more, or would it satisfy your concerns if I just ask WP:THIRDOPINION for an opinion to avoid taking up too much of your time? (Of course, if anyone else on this page shares DGG's concerns and would like to elaborate on possible concerns, feel free to chime in.) Rolf H Nelson (talk) 20:34, 6 February 2016 (UTC)[reply] Re deletion of the reference to the sex-bot article Regarding deletion of the reference to the article "Re: Sex-Bots -- Let Us Look Before We Leap" ( http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0752/7/2/15 ), several points are in order. First, the journal in which the article appears is relatively new, but it is not obscure, having recently published, for example, two articles by tech industry heavyweights -- "Can Computers Create Art?" ( http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0752/7/2/18 ) and "Art in the Age of Machine Intelligence" ( http://www.mdpi.com/2076-0752/6/4/18 ) -- and which have enjoyed between them some 9,400 page views. And yes, the article in question is an opinion piece -- but at this point in time, opinion is all we have; i.e., there is no one who can say with authority where AI is leading us, much less AI-enabled sex-bots! So if someone -- and that someone, BTW, is yours truly, although I don't think I've broken any of the WP:SELFCITE guidelines -- takes the time to express his concerns in a carefully thought-out and articulated piece, and if that piece is in turn given careful scrutiny before being published -- and yes, "Let Us Look Before We Leap" underwent a thorough peer review at Arts, even though published by them as "Opinion" -- what more could we expect from a source cited in Wikipedia regarding the quite critical and quite speculative subject of AI? And finally, regarding the argument that this Wikipedia article should be about the company and not AI in general, the fact is that OpenAI has, by its very charter, captured the subject of the desirability of requiring that all AI code to which the public is subject be open source (just as, for example, we now require public disclosure of the details of all pharmaceuticals), and thus likewise the quite understandable goal of someone who thinks that this is the correct approach: he has taken the time to articulate his arguments and have them published in a reputable journal; and he now wishes in turn to share them with a larger Wikipedia audience via said article. Comments, please! I am obviously aiming at a re-instatement of the deleted content, but can certainly be dissuaded therefrom. Synchronist (talk) 04:06, 1 August 2018 (UTC)[reply] I'll suspend judgement then on whether it's obscure. I removed the content based on its not meeting WP:RS; I'm happy to solicit other opinions though. We can always ask WP:DRR/3O for a third opinion if nobody else on talk has any thoughts on the matter. Rolf H Nelson (talk) 17:19, 5 August 2018 (UTC)[reply] The use is inappropriate: it has no mention or apparent relevance to OpenAI, we can't put things together like this per WP:SYNTH. Whether someone wants to share it is irrelevant, this is about things that are related to OpenAI. Not just the use of the source, but the commentary "...one juried commentator has asked..." is not encyclopedic. K.Bog 01:32, 28 August 2018 (UTC)[reply] Solving Rubik’s Cube with a robot hand Just want to attract attention to a new article published by OpenAI October 15th, 2019, about how they made a system that learned to solve Rubik's Cube all by itself, using only one hand (a Shadow Dexterious Hand). Maybe someone wants to add a mention of this to the article. There is a blog post, Solving Rubik’s Cube with a Robot Hand, and a scientific paper of the same name: Solving Rubik’s Cube with a Robot Hand. --Jhertel (talk) 17:38, 19 October 2019 (UTC)[reply] Re: GPT3 "Pre-training GPT-3 required several thousand petaflop/s-days of compute, compared to tens of petaflop/s-days for the full GPT-2 model." A while ago I put up a tag saying copy edit was needed, and it was reverted with a summary stating "[t]his is a correctly used technical term". I've never seen the term petaflop be used in that particular way before. These are the two glaring typographical irregularities that have gotten me stumped: petaflop/s-days: I assume this was supposed to mean either petaflops/day or petaflop-days, but both nouns are in their plural forms. I have no idea what a petaflop-day is supposed to be. petaflops/day means billions of operations per second per day, which would suggest that pre-training either GPT would require a computer to perform a certain amount of PFLOPS on one day, and more PFLOPS than that on the next day, and so on. "of compute"; I can't decide if it should be corrected to "of computation" or "to compute", so I've left that part as-is. -- MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 02:04, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply] Update: I see someone has added something in parentheses to clarify that several thousand petaflop/s-days are "a unit equivalent to approximately 1020 neural net operations". A thousand PFLOPS would be 1018 floating point operations a second. Or, since there's 86,400 seconds in a day, a petaflop would mean 8.64 × 1019 floating-point operations on a daily basis. After some digging through the edit history, I've found the edit that introduced the odd writing. Below is the prose it replaced, but I've modified the notes and citations to prevent them from adding a list to the bottom of the talkspace: Lambda Labs estimated that GPT-3 would cost US$4.6M and take 355 GPU years to train using state-of-the-art[b] GPU technology.[64] Another source lists training costs of US$12M and memory requirement of 350GB on an undisclosed hardware configuration.[65] Yet another estimate by Intento calculated that GPT-3 training would take 1 or 2 months[c] and might consume 432 MWh (1,555 GJ) of electricity if run 24/7. [66] If the overwriting sentence was supposed to specify how many PFLOPS and days "of compute [sic]" it took to pre-train GPT-3, then petaflops and days should be separate words with separate amounts. -- MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 18:44, 30 August 2020 (UTC)[reply] Update 2: To quote the source the clarifier cited; A petaflop/s-day (pfs-day) consists of performing 1015 neural net operations per second for one day, or a total of about 1020 operations. That is from the second footnote, which is for this sentence: The total amount of compute, in petaflop/s-days,[2] used to train selected results that are relatively well known, used a lot of compute for their time, and gave enough information to estimate the compute used. I think it's a bit funny how the author(s) of the OpenAI blog AI and Compute used the word compute in place of computation all over the place, as if the verb is also a common noun. -- MrPersonHumanGuy (talk) 12:26, 31 August 2020 (UTC)[reply] I'm a little late to the game, so this response is for all those students, science and non-science. @MrPersonHumanGuy, there is a reason why your high school science or chemistry teacher emphasized and stressed always paying attention to the use of units in calculations. It is quite common in technical, and particularly science fields, to have complex units (qualifiers): foot–pounds vs. newton–meters. That is a units that are other than simple: inch, gallon, ton, calorie. So your misapprehension is probably a lack of exposure. Firstly the OpenAI terminology Petaflop/s-day(sic), and pfs-day(sic). The notation is misleading, the "/" (division) should have been a dash as in a complex unit, and s-day, the dash should have been a "/" divisor, i.e. sec/day. Pardon the scientific notation. Petaflop is understood to be 1 executed computer op-code with qualifier 10^15 per second, and s-days(sic) would be 8.64 * 10^4 seconds/day (i.e. 60 sec/min * 60 min/hr * 24 hr/day = 86,400 sec/day ). So 1 petaflop–s-day = (1 * 10^15 op/sec) * (8.64 * 10^4 sec/day). Which reduces to 8.64 * 10^19 op/day. Approximately 10^20 op/day. Q.E.D. WurmWoodeT 02:23, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply] Removal of Controversy Section? The section I added about controversy concerning OpenAI is completely warranted. I can assure you the creation of OpenAI LP has generated controversy. Again just last week with the prica announcement of GPT-3 the no longer open company structure of OpenAI is debated. Could you elaborate your reasons to remove the entire Controversy section? HaeB Diff here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=OpenAI&diff=975914486&oldid=975824355 I'd like to add the announced pricing of GPT-3 to the controversy section as well but before doing that and getting it removed again. This needs resolving imho. I've seen it in many wikipedia articles that the controversial things about a subject are being repeated in that section so imho it doesn't warrant a complete errasure. Additionally it is true that they are still filing as a non-profit which is controversial given how non-transparent they have been lately. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Juliacubed (talk • contribs) 07:35, 4 September 2020 (UTC)[reply] I agree that turning for profit generated a lot of controversy and deserves a section. See https://techcrunch.com/2019/03/11/openai-shifts-from-nonprofit-to-capped-pro... and https://www.technologyreview.com/2020/02/17/844721/ai-openai-moonshot-elon-m... and https://www.wired.com/story/dark-side-big-tech-funding-ai-research/ Yannn11 16:17, 11 July 2021 (UTC)[reply] There clearly should be a Controversy section. The name "OpenAI" is deliberately misleading - it suggests that all development is open source, which is clearly not the case. Removal of the Controversy section seems to me to have been vandalism. But now the page is protected so that it's difficult to add it back. Sayitclearly (talk) 11:32, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply] For Profit owned by Non Profit? What? This is a general encyclopedia for everyone. We need to explain this corporate/Organisation construct and who can possibly profit or not profit from this. The current article is bound to confuse, rather than to clear things up. Can we please get someone who knows about this legal construct and explain it? Thanks so much. --91.64.59.134 (talk) 20:48, 24 October 2021 (UTC)[reply] A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion: DALL-E sample.png Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 14:37, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply] Unnecessary emphasis on Elon Musk? I think this page refers to Elon Musk somewhat gratuitously. In particular, it seems unnecessary to feature a relatively large portrait of Musk next to a classification of the article as belonging to a series related to Musk, and linking to a page with his honors and achievements. Musk was one of several co-founding donors to the openai project, and no longer has any involvement with it. I think it would be appropriate to remove the photo of Musk, and link to his honors and achievements. Nickstudenski (talk) 19:34, 10 June 2022 (UTC)[reply] I agree and removed "Elon Musk series." Yannn11 18:30, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply] Greg Brockman page surely time for a wiki article on him. why not? he's an important player in OpenAI and thus in AI development. https://openai.com/blog/authors/greg/ https://www.forbes.com/profile/greg-brockman/ https://csuitespotlight.com/2022/08/23/ivy-league-dropout-greg-brockman-is-l... JCJC777 (talk) 13:10, 4 January 2023 (UTC)[reply] Categories: Start-Class company articles Mid-importance company articles WikiProject Companies articles Start-Class California articles Low-importance California articles Start-Class San Francisco Bay Area articles Low-importance San Francisco Bay Area articles San Francisco Bay Area task force articles WikiProject California articles Start-Class Computing articles Mid-importance Computing articles All Computing articles Start-Class Computer science articles Mid-importance Computer science articles WikiProject Computer science articles Start-Class organization articles Mid-importance organization articles WikiProject Organizations articles B-Class Effective Altruism articles Mid-importance Effective Altruism articles This page was last edited on 4 January 2023, at 13:12 (UTC). Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License 3.0; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of the Wikimedia Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization. Privacy policy About Wikipedia Disclaimers Contact Wikipedia Mobile view Developers Statistics Cookie statement Wikimedia Foundation Powered by MediaWiki