Impressive! Indeed I thought the AI lyrics seemed akin to Bon Jovi and had to ask ChatGPT about the corresponding style that I can paste to Suno...

Wenn ich mir diesen Bloomberg Artikel (www.bloomberg.com/news/article...) anschaue, frage ich mich ob es nicht vielleicht kostengünstiger ist noch ein paar Jahre länger Steinkohlereservekraftwerke zu nutzen, bis Rechencenter-Boom etwas abflaut... Vielleicht ist man auch etwas resillienter.

Today GPT 5, is back with the usual "Great question" etc... I wonder whether OpenAI adapted the system prompt a bit back in that direction.

My ChatGPT run did not find a hidden prompt injection in your paper. chatgpt.com/share/6890b9... I don't think there is. I asked for a review and whether it is Top 5. Unlike for the computer science papers it listed weaknesses. Ok, it offered a Top 5 R&R, but it offered that even for a paper of mine

But does it work if you can simply ask the AI to check for prompt injections? At least for the computer science papers in the news with the hidden small white font prompt injection in the PDF, ChatGPT correctly told me that there is an injection when asked. See chatgpt.com/share/686bd0...

Thanks for the beta. Yes, definitely got impressive new insights about exposition issues in quite technical paragraphs, compared to running once o3 or Gemini 2.5 pro with a simple prompt ("Critically discuss the attached paper on a technical level. Also suggest improvements for the exposition.")

3 / The AI explains its reasoning in the body of the function. Makes kind of sense (if Stata does indeed perform such rounding), but is not really the translation I want... Let's see where another attempt, with tests that compare rounded values only, leads too...

2/ Well while the result after 10 agent iterations are not bad, it does mainly teach me the subtleties of testing and prompting to reduce "reward hacking". Look at the translation my package generates in the image

Tried it out and it works indeed amazingly well... I just hope that it will not become the new standard that reviewers ask to implemented ALL suggestions that o3 comes up with. Obviously, almost every published paper still could be improved with enough resources...

I meant "interactive voice mode"

Essential is to find paths where not many others go. Not in a literal sense, but otherwise talking to ChatGPT about econometric stuff seems a bit too weird, even for me.