<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>An improved example for an autoconvolution inequality · HackerPapers discussions</title><link>https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2506.16750/</link><description>Collected HN comments and submissions linking this paper.</description><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2026 11:16:22 GMT</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2506.16750/feed.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><item><title>An improved example for an autoconvolution inequality — mentioned by vatsachak</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45836572</link><guid isPermaLink="false">urn:hackerpapers:mention:2506.16750:45836572</guid><pubDate>Thu, 06 Nov 2025 15:55:31 GMT</pubDate><description>&lt;p&gt;As Daniel Litt pointed out on Twitter, this was the first time a lot of those problems were hit with a lot of compute. Some of AlphaEvolve&amp;#x27;s inequalities were beaten rather easily by humans and Moore&amp;#x27;s law https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.16750&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;a href="https://hackerpaper.kaipfister.de/p/2506.16750/"&gt;Paper and discussion history&lt;/a&gt;. A mention is not an endorsement.&lt;/p&gt;</description><category>math.CA</category></item></channel></rss>
