Instagram story viewer> @sarah.ellynor> Post
Sarah Mitchell(sarah.ellynor)'s profile avatar

Sarah Mitchell

@sarah.ellynor

a year ago
Photo by Sarah Mitchell on July 23, 2025.
Photo by Sarah Mitchell on July 23, 2025.
Photo by Sarah Mitchell on July 23, 2025.
Photo by Sarah Mitchell on July 23, 2025.
Photo by Sarah Mitchell on July 23, 2025.
Photo by Sarah Mitchell on July 23, 2025.
Photo by Sarah Mitchell on July 23, 2025.
Download
10
Posted On: July 23rd 2025, 04:12 pm
Tagged Users:
@librahimbo
librahimbo
@mikedeus
mikedeus
@delianeville
delianeville
@mok_ingbird
mok_ingbird
@joshdeus
joshdeus
i ❤️ my friends
Comments (10)
emilyyrr_ a year ago

emilyyrr_

so good to see you! ❤️

librahimbo a year ago

librahimbo

okay baddies

joshdeus a year ago

joshdeus

I LOVE

zsaurette a year ago

zsaurette

Hot

gracemarkertt a year ago

gracemarkertt

I ❤️ u

amandatiso_ a year ago

amandatiso_

pretties

delianeville a year ago

delianeville

Loveee sm

mok_ingbird a year ago

mok_ingbird

My fwens ❤️

mikedeus a year ago

mikedeus

love this and u

mikedeus a year ago

mikedeus

OBSESSED

More posts

2026 NYC Marathon Signs.
You’re welcome. Willem Dafoe for Outlander Magazine Issue 02. Link in bio🙂‍↕️
@messika
ㅝ곤
BAAAAAAMMM CUNHA MAN UNITED 2-2 AS ROMA GAME ON! 🤯
Linköping University professor Peter Jonsson is set to have his work presented in two weeks’ time at one of the most prestigious conferences in theoretical computer science. As of Monday, much of that work is “dead,” he says, after AI showed that a 27-year-old hypothesis underpinning it is wrong. Both OpenAI and Anthropic claimed this week to have disproved the exponential time hypothesis (ETH). Vast swaths of theoretical computer science research on complexity and algorithm design have been built on the premise that the effort it takes to solve certain problems increases exponentially with the size of the problem. Jonsson expects his predicament will be “very common” at the IEEE Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science, where his work will be presented by one of his coauthors. “People will start the talks: ‘ETH is false, half of my paper does not work,’” he says. It’s a vexing problem, Jonsson says, “but at the same time, we learn a lot from it. And this is what science is about.” Researchers haven’t independently verified, let alone had time to fully understand, the AI-produced proofs, which both firms have published on GitHub in both natural language and its machine-checkable Lean format. OpenAI has asked the UC Santa Barbara computer scientists who originally proposed the hypothesis, plus an MIT academic who has refuted a version of ETH, to rally researchers to unpack the proofs. So far, this effort includes a Google form asking for volunteers and feedback, and a commitment from OpenAI to fund a conference on the topic. Tap the 🔗 in bio to read the full story.
back to up