Tristan Buckmaster
- Role
- Mathematician directly involved in the research and disputed conversations, speaking in his own capacity
- Statement date
Tristan Buckmaster on Did OpenAI improperly pressure mathematicians over authorship and credit?
“Sébastien's statement below is wildly false.”
Source and context
Original text
About this source
Original three-post thread. Buckmaster challenges Bubeck's account of the career-related remarks and Altman's accounts of Alpöge's willingness to communicate and the teams' approaches. The continuation quotes Bubeck's explanation and apology, then calls for discussion with AI labs about research conduct. This is evidence of Buckmaster's response, not independent authentication of the disputed private calls. The verified timestamp is the original first post's publication time.
Before the quotation
Bubeck's September 8 response said he apologized for his career-related wording and retracted it during the call. Altman separately defended the team's conduct and described its attempts to coordinate with the researchers.
After the quotation
In the continuation, Buckmaster reproduces Bubeck's explanation and apology wording, then calls for discussions with AI labs about preventing similar conduct. The opposing accounts remain unresolved; this thread is not a withdrawal of Buckmaster's prior criticism.
How this statement is classified
The full three-post response not only disputes facts but labels the conduct unethical and calls for prevention. Coding only the first factual denial understates the complete response’s condemnation.
- Recorded on
- Published here
- People and groups discussed
- Sébastien Bubeck, Sam Altman, OpenAI
Corrections to this statement
These notices document reporting corrections, classification changes, and topic-label updates.
Classification correction
Correction to: Statement by Tristan Buckmaster
- Previous classification
- Challenges the characterization. The post directly disputes the other participants' public accounts. It does not independently establish what occurred during the private calls or replace Buckmaster's earlier position.
- Corrected classification
- Condemns. The full three-post response not only disputes facts but labels the conduct unethical and calls for prevention. Coding only the first factual denial understates the complete response’s condemnation.
We corrected the editorial classification of Tristan Buckmaster's response about Bubeck’s and Altman’s accounts and the conduct they describe. The full three-post response not only disputes facts but labels the conduct unethical and calls for prevention. Coding only the first factual denial understates the complete response’s condemnation. This corrects our labeling, not a later change in the speaker's position.
This corrects an editorial classification.
Original three-post thread. Buckmaster challenges Bubeck's account of the career-related remarks and Altman's accounts of Alpöge's willingness to communicate and the teams' approaches. The continuation quotes Bubeck's explanation and apology, then calls for discussion with AI labs about research conduct. This is evidence of Buckmaster's response, not independent authentication of the disputed private calls. The verified timestamp is the original first post's publication time.
More from this case
"breaks the norms of the academic math community."Read statement
"De-identification may remove a name; it does not remove the intellectual content of a mathematical idea."Read statement
"exactly how was this done?"Read statement