80 points wsxiaoys 2 hours ago 24 comments
7734128 1 hour ago | parent
Qwen 3.8 0902 was trained after the release of the paper on August 10, so it should have seen those specific thoughts.
usernomdeguerre 1 hour ago | parent
verdverm 57 minutes ago | parent
refulgentis 1 hour ago | parent
I "independently" "invented" it for the first Anthropic reasoning models because the API required you have thoughts for each assistant message. My app lets you switch AIs within a chat, and their API used to require thinking for all messages if thinking was enabled, so I needed to get a valid thinking stub to insert.
Time has flew by for me the last 3 years, but, I'd guess it's been at least 18 months. And IMHO it wasn't very complicated to work through how to do once you were dead set on making it happen. I expect it was well-known to distillers before the paper.
7734128 36 minutes ago | parent
My point is that any model trained after August 10 will know of those specific thoughts.
refulgentis 9 minutes ago | parent
wongarsu 1 hour ago | parent
If I got it correct (appending B from https://stolen-thoughts.com/paper.pdf is essential) they are the authors of the well-known exploit to recover readable CoT from OpenAI and Anthropic models. They use that to find hints of distillation, by running a benchmark with a SotA model, recovering the CoT, then taking the first 1% of the CoT and running the open-source model as if that was the start of its own CoT. In the paper they found that Kimi-K3 gets a lot closer to Claude 4.8 answers when prefilled with the start of Claude 4.8 reasoning, suggesting that Claude 4.8 was used in its post-training. This blog post is the follow-up with results that suggest that Qwen3.8 was post-trained with the help of GPT-5.5 Pro (or some similarly responding GPT model, it's unclear how many models they tested)
jari_mustonen 1 hour ago | parent
How does this suggest anyting of the sorts?
wsxiaoys 1 hour ago | parent
unrented7977 1 hour ago | parent
Score go up. Probability go up. Conclusion.
CamperBob2 1 hour ago | parent
noir_lord 1 hour ago | parent
verdverm 55 minutes ago | parent
I look forward to a day when open models are so dominant that we stop considering traces to be some form of intellectual property that must be hidden from / manipulated for paying users.
It's that manipulation of inputs and outputs that really rubs me the wrong way
vezycash 34 minutes ago | parent
vlyan 52 minutes ago | parent
this what is permissible for Jupiter is not permissible for a cow bullshit alone should tell people all they need to know about what kind of greasy sociopaths run "open"ai and (mis)anthropic, and how seriously you should take their purported stances on "safety" and other self-serving shit.
RivieraKid 39 minutes ago | parent
brcmthrowaway 38 minutes ago | parent
If Qwen and other Chinese labs are just copying reasoning traces, then those labs are more than a year behind the frontier.
atomicnumber3 26 minutes ago | parent
Even if they weren't political adversaries of freedom, I would still feel 0% bad given all their training is already on data they got for free.
Information continues to want to be free. To the benefit of us all.
vipa123 17 minutes ago | parent
spijdar 36 minutes ago | parent
Attach. Use hub debugger. Ensure source binary perhaps same. start. todo init. parallel no. two tool calls in same turn sequential is okay. immediately. exactly. Need not mention apologies yet final. [...] Let's do. [...] Do tools. Use commentary. Let's initiate. rambling no. use tool. searching now. okay. Really must call. Let's send. done. why stuck? generate. Sorry. go. no more. (The answer engine expects tool). [...] I think no hidden issue. Go. I'll type tool. now. Stop internal repetition. We have 8000 tokens. tool. sorry. I'll produce call. need include i. Great. final. no. Let's send.gpt. This may be bug. I'll consciously construct tool message next.
It eventually triggered some error state and stopped.Nevertheless, this was the first time I'd seen Sol's CoT. I looked up the stolen thought's paper, aaaaand yep, that's Sol's CoT alright.
But it occurred to me, hey, Qwen3.8 27B's CoT seems ... very similar.
I compared the geometry problem in the paper, which had a reasoning block open with:
We need solve. Need reason geometry Weber point? Given pentagon sides and angles. Need find min sum distances. Likely construct rotations / Fermat point lower bound via vectors calibration, maybe triangulation.
I passed the same prompt to Qwen, which opened with: We need solve geometry optimization. We need provide final answer. Let's analyze thoroughly.
This proves nothing, but it does seem an awful lot like they did use GTP-5.5/6 reasoning traces...stymaar 9 minutes ago | parent
What? I've never seen garbled CoT like the one you posted when using Qwen3.8-27B.
c7b 6 minutes ago | parent
But for the question studied here it probably doesn't matter - overlaps in the publicly available output may be indicative of distillation (or not), regardless of what it is. I would just find it surprising that the Chinese labs would use them so trustingly. The publicly released reasoning trace is the first place where I would suspect some distillation poisoning to be injected.