Expert attention map

The Who's Who of AI

What credible people across AI noticed, why it matters, and where the field is converging or disagreeing.

2,397 searchable experts 4,280 tracked across all sources
Build my stream Create my edition
Filter the conversation Who is saying what?

Combine a professional role with a reaction lens. Both must match the same attributed contribution.

Clear all
Active evidence filter

Showing developments with attributable Opportunity & adoption reactions.

New Network reaction maps

See how experts are reacting—not just what they shared.

Posts are grouped by conversation and tone. Select a lens to filter the stream; these are never permanent labels on people.

Opportunity & adoption
0 live reaction maps in this view

No development in this filter has enough independent reactions yet. The maps appear as soon as the evidence supports them.

Debated

The questions experts are actively pulling apart

One card per development. Sources are clustered; reaction bundles describe these posts, never the people behind them.

No developments match these filters yet.

Try the field-wide view or clear one of the filters.

Clear filters
More conversations

What experts are discussing without an anchoring article

2 experts · 6 posts · 1d ago
SE Gyges Colin
Matches Opportunity & adoption
“It’s not really that, exactly. The math thing is just the LLM doing some data analysis and then tweaking the model, much in the exact same way that a skilled human might. It’s impressive but not mo…” evidence ↗
SE Gyges: this is an insanely funny admission given that the post is still correct in terms of all of the literal words that are literally in the post
Colin: there's just nothing really to address. The math performance thing on the small Qwen model is just a programming task. A kind of strange one, but not an especially impossible one. It doesn't reveal…
Open the thread →