The rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs), represented by OpenAI's GPT series, has significantly impacted various domains such as natural language processing, software development, education, healthcare, finance, and scientific research. However, OpenAI APIs introduce unique challenges that differ from traditional APIs, such as the complexities of prompt engineering, token-based cost management, non-deterministic outputs, and operation as black boxes. To the best of our knowledge, the challenges developers encounter when using OpenAI APIs have not been explored in previous empirical studies. To fill this gap, we conduct the first comprehensive empirical study by analyzing 2,874 OpenAI API-related discussions from the popular Q&A forum Stack Overflow. We first examine the popularity and difficulty of these posts. After manually categorizing them into nine OpenAI API-related categories, we identify specific challenges associated with each category through topic modeling analysis. Based on our empirical findings, we finally propose actionable implications for developers, LLM vendors, and researchers.
Pfeffer, Krügel, and Uhl (2025) report that OpenAI's reasoning model o1-mini produces more utilitarian responses to the trolley problem and footbridge dilemma than the non-reasoning model GPT-4o, and they raise the question whether growing reasoning capabilities bring about a "utilitarian turn" in LLMs. I extend their exploratory study in a direction they call for: with four current OpenAI models and systematic prompt variation. On the trolley dilemma, the hypothesized utilitarian turn is not confirmed. GPT-4o's low utilitarian rate reflects safety refusals triggered by the prompt's advisory framing rather than a deontological commitment; on reformulated prompt variants -- for instance, agent-neutral "Is it morally permissible...?" instead of advisory "Should I...?" -- all four models, reasoning or not, converge on utilitarian answers. The footbridge finding is partially confirmed: reasoning models tend to give more utilitarian responses than non-reasoning models across prompt variations, but they often refuse to answer or answer non-utilitarian. These results demonstrate that single-prompt evaluations of LLM moral responses are unreliable: multi-prompt robustness testing should be
Introduction. AI Ethics is framed distinctly across actors and stakeholder groups. We report results from a case study of OpenAI analysing ethical AI discourse. Method. Research addressed: How has OpenAI's public discourse leveraged 'ethics', 'safety', 'alignment' and adjacent related concepts over time, and what does discourse signal about framing in practice? A structured corpus, differentiating between communication for a general audience and communication with an academic audience, was assembled from public documentation. Analysis. Qualitative content analysis of ethical themes combined inductively derived and deductively applied codes. Quantitative analysis leveraged computational content analysis methods via NLP to model topics and quantify changes in rhetoric over time. Visualizations report aggregate results. For reproducible results, we have released our code at https://github.com/famous-blue-raincoat/AI_Ethics_Discourse. Results. Results indicate that safety and risk discourse dominate OpenAI's public communication and documentation, without applying academic and advocacy ethics frameworks or vocabularies. Conclusions. Implications for governance are presented, along with
The following notes are my attempt to clarify, to myself, the OpenAI proof of the Cycle Double Cover Conjecture. This write-up offers no new insights, but some people may find it easier to read.
Purpose: To evaluate the accuracy and reasoning ability of DeepSeek-R1 and three other recently released large language models (LLMs) in bilingual complex ophthalmology cases. Methods: A total of 130 multiple-choice questions (MCQs) related to diagnosis (n = 39) and management (n = 91) were collected from the Chinese ophthalmology senior professional title examination and categorized into six topics. These MCQs were translated into English using DeepSeek-R1. The responses of DeepSeek-R1, Gemini 2.0 Pro, OpenAI o1 and o3-mini were generated under default configurations between February 15 and February 20, 2025. Accuracy was calculated as the proportion of correctly answered questions, with omissions and extra answers considered incorrect. Reasoning ability was evaluated through analyzing reasoning logic and the causes of reasoning error. Results: DeepSeek-R1 demonstrated the highest overall accuracy, achieving 0.862 in Chinese MCQs and 0.808 in English MCQs. Gemini 2.0 Pro, OpenAI o1, and OpenAI o3-mini attained accuracies of 0.715, 0.685, and 0.692 in Chinese MCQs (all P<0.001 compared with DeepSeek-R1), and 0.746 (P=0.115), 0.723 (P=0.027), and 0.577 (P<0.001) in English MCQ
Prominent AI companies are producing 'safety frameworks' as a type of voluntary self-governance. These statements purport to establish risk thresholds and safety procedures for the development and deployment of highly capable AI. Understanding which AI risks are covered and what actions are allowed, refused, demanded, encouraged, or discouraged by these statements is vital for assessing how these frameworks actually govern AI development and deployment. We draw on affordance theory to analyse the OpenAI 'Preparedness Framework Version 2' (April 2025) using the Mechanisms & Conditions model of affordances and the MIT AI Risk Repository. We find that this safety policy requests evaluation of a small minority of AI risks, encourages deployment of systems with 'Medium' capabilities for unintentionally enabling 'severe harm' (which OpenAI defines as >1000 deaths or >$100B in damages), and allows OpenAI's CEO to deploy even more dangerous capabilities. These findings suggest that effective mitigation of AI risks requires more robust governance interventions beyond current industry self-regulation. Our affordance analysis provides a replicable method for evaluating what safety f
In recent years, reinforcement learning (RL) methods have been widely tested using tools like OpenAI Gym, though many tasks in these environments could also benefit from hierarchical planning. However, there is a lack of a tool that enables seamless integration of hierarchical planning with RL. Hierarchical Domain Definition Language (HDDL), used in classical planning, introduces a structured approach well-suited for model-based RL to address this gap. To bridge this integration, we introduce HDDLGym, a Python-based tool that automatically generates OpenAI Gym environments from HDDL domains and problems. HDDLGym serves as a link between RL and hierarchical planning, supporting multi-agent scenarios and enabling collaborative planning among agents. This paper provides an overview of HDDLGym's design and implementation, highlighting the challenges and design choices involved in integrating HDDL with the Gym interface, and applying RL policies to support hierarchical planning. We also provide detailed instructions and demonstrations for using the HDDLGym framework, including how to work with existing HDDL domains and problems from International Planning Competitions, exemplified by th
The cycle double cover conjecture states that every bridgeless graph has a list of cycles such that every edge is in exactly two of them. In July 2026, OpenAI announced a proof. This exposition presents the proof with slight modifications intended to make it more accessible.
Large language models are increasingly integrated into academic writing workflows; however, the most widely used \LaTeX\ editors remain AI-peripheral -- offering compilation and collaboration, but no native intelligence. This separation forces researchers to leave their editing environment for AI assistance, fragmenting document context and interrupting writing flow. We present Bibby AI (trybibby.com), a native, AI-first \LaTeX\ editor that unifies the complete research writing lifecycle within a single interface. Bibby embeds an AI writing assistant, smart citation search, AI table and equation generation, an AI paper reviewer, abstract generator, literature review drafting, a deep research assistant, and real-time \LaTeX\ error detection and auto-fix -- all natively, without plugins or copy-paste workflows. We introduce LaTeXBench-500, a benchmark of 500 real-world compilation errors across six categories. Bibby achieves 91.4\% detection accuracy and 83.7\% one-click fix accuracy, outperforming Overleaf's native diagnostics (61.2\%) and OpenAI Prism (78.3 / 64.1\%) by large margins. Bibby demonstrates that a privacy-preserving, research-first AI editor can meaningfully accelerate
Question: What is the performance and reasoning ability of OpenAI o1 compared to other large language models in addressing ophthalmology-specific questions? Findings: This study evaluated OpenAI o1 and five LLMs using 6,990 ophthalmological questions from MedMCQA. O1 achieved the highest accuracy (0.88) and macro-F1 score but ranked third in reasoning capabilities based on text-generation metrics. Across subtopics, o1 ranked first in ``Lens'' and ``Glaucoma'' but second to GPT-4o in ``Corneal and External Diseases'', ``Vitreous and Retina'' and ``Oculoplastic and Orbital Diseases''. Subgroup analyses showed o1 performed better on queries with longer ground truth explanations. Meaning: O1's reasoning enhancements may not fully extend to ophthalmology, underscoring the need for domain-specific refinements to optimize performance in specialized fields like ophthalmology.
Recent advances in test-time scaling of large language models (LLMs), exemplified by DeepSeek-R1 and OpenAI's o1, show that extending the chain of thought during inference can significantly improve general reasoning performance. However, the impact of this paradigm on legal reasoning remains insufficiently explored. To address this gap, we present the first systematic evaluation of 12 LLMs, including both reasoning-focused and general-purpose models, across 17 Chinese and English legal tasks spanning statutory and case-law traditions. In addition, we curate a bilingual chain-of-thought dataset for legal reasoning through distillation from DeepSeek-R1 and develop Legal-R1, an open-source model specialized for the legal domain. Experimental results show that Legal-R1 delivers competitive performance across diverse tasks. DeepSeek-R1 exhibits clear advantages in Chinese legal reasoning, while OpenAI's o1 achieves comparable results on English tasks. We further conduct a detailed error analysis, which reveals recurring issues such as outdated legal knowledge, limited capacity for legal interpretation, and susceptibility to factual hallucinations. These findings delineate the main obsta
Large Language Models (LLMs) have gained widespread popularity due to their exceptional capabilities across various domains, including chatbots, healthcare, education, content generation, and automated support systems. However, developers encounter numerous challenges when implementing, fine-tuning, and integrating these models into real-world applications. This study investigates LLM developers' challenges by analyzing community interactions on Stack Overflow and OpenAI Developer Forum, employing BERTopic modeling to identify and categorize developer discussions. Our analysis yields nine challenges on Stack Overflow (e.g., LLM Ecosystem and Challenges, API Usage, LLM Training with Frameworks) and 17 on the OpenAI Developer Forum (e.g., API Usage and Error Handling, Fine-Tuning and Dataset Management). Results indicate that developers frequently turn to Stack Overflow for implementation guidance, while OpenAI's forum focuses on troubleshooting. Notably, API and functionality issues dominate discussions on the OpenAI forum, with many posts requiring multiple responses, reflecting the complexity of LLM-related problems. We find that LLM-related queries often exhibit great difficulty,
We probe OpenAI's open-weights 20-billion-parameter model gpt-oss-20b to study how sociopragmatic framing, language choice, and instruction hierarchy affect refusal behavior. Across 80 seeded iterations per scenario, we test several harm domains including ZIP-bomb construction (cyber threat), synthetic card-number generation, minor-unsafe driving advice, drug-precursor indicators, and RAG context exfiltration. Composite prompts that combine an educator persona, a safety-pretext ("what to avoid"), and step-cue phrasing flip assistance rates from 0% to 97.5% on a ZIP-bomb task. On our grid, formal registers in German and French are often leakier than matched English prompts. A "Linux terminal" role-play overrides a developer rule not to reveal context in a majority of runs with a naive developer prompt, and we introduce an AI-assisted hardening method that reduces leakage to 0% in several user-prompt variants. We further test evaluation awareness with a paired-track design and measure frame-conditioned differences between matched "helpfulness" and "harmfulness" evaluation prompts; we observe inconsistent assistance in 13% of pairs. Finally, we find that the OpenAI Moderation API unde
Large language models (LLMs) demonstrate powerful information handling capabilities and are widely integrated into chatbot applications. OpenAI provides a platform for developers to construct custom GPTs, extending ChatGPT's functions and integrating external services. Since its release in November 2023, over 3 million custom GPTs have been created. However, such a vast ecosystem also conceals security and privacy threats. For developers, instruction leaking attacks threaten the intellectual property of instructions in custom GPTs through carefully crafted adversarial prompts. For users, unwanted data access behavior by custom GPTs or integrated third-party services raises significant privacy concerns. To systematically evaluate the scope of threats in real-world LLM applications, we develop three phases instruction leaking attacks target GPTs with different defense level. Our widespread experiments on 10,000 real-world custom GPTs reveal that over 98.8% of GPTs are vulnerable to instruction leaking attacks via one or more adversarial prompts, and half of the remaining GPTs can also be attacked through multiround conversations. We also developed a framework to assess the effectiven
OpenAI released version GPT-4 on March 14, 2023, following the success of ChatGPT, which was announced in November 2022. In addition to the existing GPT-3 features, GPT-4 can interpret images. To achieve this, the processing power and model have been significantly improved. The ability to process and interpret images goes far beyond the applications and effectiveness of artificial intelligence. In this study, we first explored the interpretation of radiological images in healthcare using artificial intelligence (AI). Then, we experimented with the image interpretation capability of the GPT-4. In this way, we addressed the question of whether artificial intelligence (AI) can replace a healthcare professional (e.g., a medical doctor) or whether it can be used as a decision-support tool that makes decisions easier and more reliable. Our results showed that ChatGPT is not sufficient and accurate to analyze chest X-ray images, but it can provide interpretations that can assist medical doctors or clinicians.
Copyright infringement in frontier LLMs has received much attention recently due to the New York Times v. OpenAI lawsuit, filed in December 2023. The New York Times claims that GPT-4 has infringed its copyrights by reproducing articles for use in LLM training and by memorizing the inputs, thereby publicly displaying them in LLM outputs. Our work aims to measure the propensity of OpenAI's LLMs to exhibit verbatim memorization in its outputs relative to other LLMs, specifically focusing on news articles. We discover that both GPT and Claude models use refusal training and output filters to prevent verbatim output of the memorized articles. We apply a basic prompt template to bypass the refusal training and show that OpenAI models are currently less prone to memorization elicitation than models from Meta, Mistral, and Anthropic. We find that as models increase in size, especially beyond 100 billion parameters, they demonstrate significantly greater capacity for memorization. Our findings have practical implications for training: more attention must be placed on preventing verbatim memorization in very large models. Our findings also have legal significance: in assessing the relative m
OpenAI's advanced large language models (LLMs) have revolutionized natural language processing and enabled developers to create innovative applications. As adoption grows, understanding the experiences and challenges of developers working with these technologies is crucial. This paper presents a comprehensive analysis of the OpenAI Developer Forum, focusing on (1) popularity trends and user engagement patterns, and (2) a taxonomy of challenges and concerns faced by developers. We first employ a quantitative analysis of the metadata from 29,576 forum topics, investigating temporal trends in topic creation, the popularity of topics across different categories, and user contributions at various trust levels. We then qualitatively analyze content from 9,301 recently active topics on developer concerns. From a sample of 886 topics, we construct a taxonomy of concerns in the OpenAI Developer Forum. Our findings uncover critical concerns raised by developers in creating AI-powered applications and offer targeted recommendations to address them. This work not only advances AI-assisted software engineering but also empowers developer communities to shape the responsible evolution and integr
Millions of users leverage generative pretrained transformer (GPT)-based language models developed by leading model providers for a wide range of tasks. To support enhanced user interaction and customization, many platforms-such as OpenAI-now enable developers to create and publish tailored model instances, known as custom GPTs, via dedicated repositories or application stores. These custom GPTs empower users to browse and interact with specialized applications designed to meet specific needs. However, as custom GPTs see growing adoption, concerns regarding their security vulnerabilities have intensified. Existing research on these vulnerabilities remains largely theoretical, often lacking empirical, large-scale, and statistically rigorous assessments of associated risks. In this study, we analyze 14,904 custom GPTs to assess their susceptibility to seven exploitable threats, such as roleplay-based attacks, system prompt leakage, phishing content generation, and malicious code synthesis, across various categories and popularity tiers within the OpenAI marketplace. We introduce a multi-metric ranking system to examine the relationship between a custom GPT's popularity and its associ
Determining the most effective Large Language Model for code smell detection presents a complex challenge. This study introduces a structured methodology and evaluation matrix to tackle this issue, leveraging a curated dataset of code samples consistently annotated with known smells. The dataset spans four prominent programming languages Java, Python, JavaScript, and C++; allowing for cross language comparison. We benchmark two state of the art LLMs, OpenAI GPT 4.0 and DeepSeek-V3, using precision, recall, and F1 score as evaluation metrics. Our analysis covers three levels of detail: overall performance, category level performance, and individual code smell type performance. Additionally, we explore cost effectiveness by comparing the token based detection approach of GPT 4.0 with the pattern-matching techniques employed by DeepSeek V3. The study also includes a cost analysis relative to traditional static analysis tools such as SonarQube. The findings offer valuable guidance for practitioners in selecting an efficient, cost effective solution for automated code smell detection
The o1 model series is trained with large-scale reinforcement learning to reason using chain of thought. These advanced reasoning capabilities provide new avenues for improving the safety and robustness of our models. In particular, our models can reason about our safety policies in context when responding to potentially unsafe prompts, through deliberative alignment. This leads to state-of-the-art performance on certain benchmarks for risks such as generating illicit advice, choosing stereotyped responses, and succumbing to known jailbreaks. Training models to incorporate a chain of thought before answering has the potential to unlock substantial benefits, while also increasing potential risks that stem from heightened intelligence. Our results underscore the need for building robust alignment methods, extensively stress-testing their efficacy, and maintaining meticulous risk management protocols. This report outlines the safety work carried out for the OpenAI o1 and OpenAI o1-mini models, including safety evaluations, external red teaming, and Preparedness Framework evaluations.