Sam Altman on X: "I spent much of the weekend talking with the team who did this work. Seb--and everyone else--acted with integrity and generosity throughout.

Initially we believed the other team had also solved the problem. We wanted to collaborate and do a joint release.

When we learned that t… / XPostLog inSign upPostSam Altman on X: "I spent much of the weekend talking with the team who did this work. Seb--and everyone else--acted with integrity and generosity throughout.

Initially we believed the other team had also solved the problem. We wanted to collaborate and do a joint release.

When we learned that they had Euler but not Navier-Stokes, we offered to let them go first, to suggest that they should be the ones to get the prize, and optionally for Tristan to be the lead author on a rewrite of the OpenAI proof. We felt it was challenging to offer the same to Levent (an Anthropic employee), who was not willing to talk or coordinate with us anyway. We were open to other solutions.

We would have greatly preferred coordination. We did not rush to publish even though the other team wasn't communicating with us. The team threatened us with unfounded accusations of plagarism.

Now that we can see their work, the approaches appear to be different. It is also worth noting that our latest model can solve many, many other math problems.

It is true that we tried this because there were rumors on the internet last week that Anthropic's models had solved a millennium problem and we were curious if ours could do it too."Sam Altman@samaI spent much of the weekend talking with the team who did this work. Seb--and everyone else--acted with integrity and generosity throughout.

Initially we believed the other team had also solved the problem. We wanted to collaborate and do a joint release.

When we learned that they had Euler but not Navier-Stokes, we offered to let them go first, to suggest that they should be the ones to get the prize, and optionally for Tristan to be the lead author on a rewrite of the OpenAI proof. We felt it was challenging to offer the same to Levent (an Anthropic employee), who was not willing to talk or coordinate with us anyway. We were open to other solutions.

We would have greatly preferred coordination. We did not rush to publish even though the other team wasn't communicating with us. The team threatened us with unfounded accusations of plagarism.

Now that we can see their work, the approaches appear to be different. It is also worth noting that our latest model can solve many, many other math problems.

It is true that we tried this because there were rumors on the internet last week that Anthropic's models had solved a millennium problem and we were curious if ours could do it too.Sebastien Bubeck@SebastienBubeck14hI would like to clarify a few things:

1) The screenshot is my reaching out to Levent to coordinate our releases. I hope it’s clear from the message that we came in with the best possible intentions.

2) I never ever asked for Levent to be removed from authorship of his own work Show more6:02 PM · Sep 8, 20262.8MViews7875329.8K2.8KLog in or sign up for XSee what’s happening and join the conversationContinue with phoneContinue with AppleContinue with Google or Log in with username or emailRelevant peopleSam Altman@samaFollowTrending nowTerms·Privacy·Cookies·Accessibility·US TIDA·Ads Info·More© 2026 X Corp.Sam Altman@samaI spent much of the weekend talking with the team who did this work. Seb--and everyone else--acted with integrity and generosity throughout.

Initially we believed the other team had also solved the problem. We wanted to collaborate and do a joint release.

When we learned that they had Euler but not Navier-Stokes, we offered to let them go first, to suggest that they should be the ones to get the prize, and optionally for Tristan to be the lead author on a rewrite of the OpenAI proof. We felt it was challenging to offer the same to Levent (an Anthropic employee), who was not willing to talk or coordinate with us anyway. We were open to other solutions.

We would have greatly preferred coordination. We did not rush to publish even though the other team wasn't communicating with us. The team threatened us with unfounded accusations of plagarism.

Now that we can see their work, the approaches appear to be different. It is also worth noting that our latest model can solve many, many other math problems.

It is true that we tried this because there were rumors on the internet last week that Anthropic's models had solved a millennium problem and we were curious if ours could do it too.Sebastien Bubeck@SebastienBubeck14hI would like to clarify a few things:

1) The screenshot is my reaching out to Levent to coordinate our releases. I hope it’s clear from the message that we came in with the best possible intentions.

2) I never ever asked for Levent to be removed from authorship of his own work Show more6:02 PM · Sep 8, 20262.8MViews7885329.8K2.8K⁵⁵¹¹ 🍌@BAYC551113hLMAO7162K43KJohn@iYaT_TA13hThose two researchers spent years doing their work and you guys took days right.. your model accidentally or incidentally used a model that is trained with their work..
The thing is you got caught red-handed again, the reason for this quick hand washing.8301.6K49KAtalocke@atalocke12hWhat about you threatening them?8191.4K31K

Sam Altman reflected on discussions with the team responsible for a specific body of work, noting that all involved acted with integrity and generosity throughout their interactions. Initially, the group had hoped to collaborate on a joint release, assuming the other party had already solved the underlying problem. The dynamic shifted when they learned that the other team possessed knowledge of Euler's equations but not Navier-Stokes. In response, the group proposed several concessions, including allowing the other team to proceed first, suggesting they should receive the prize, and optionally offering Tristan the position of lead author on a rewrite of the OpenAI proof. This negotiation was complicated by the fact that it was challenging to extend similar offers to Levent, an employee of Anthropic, who was unwilling to engage in coordination. Despite this, Altman emphasized that they greatly preferred coordination, noting that they did not rush publication even when the other team failed to communicate with them, a situation exacerbated by threats of plagiarism leveled against them. Reflecting on the work later revealed that the approaches taken by the different groups were distinct, and it was also pointed out that their latest model demonstrated the capacity to solve numerous other mathematical problems, stemming from initial curiosity about rumors concerning Anthropic's models having solved a millennium problem.

Sebastien Bubeck clarified aspects of this interaction, specifically addressing concerns regarding intent and authorship. He stated that a screenshot related to coordinating releases was sent to Levent, emphasizing that their intentions were entirely positive. Furthermore, he explicitly affirmed that he never requested the removal of Levent from the authorship of his own work. The exchange also touched upon external criticisms, such as accusations that their model had incidentally utilized work trained on by another group, and implied conflict regarding the threats of plagiarism made during the process.