Twitter/X

Author Andrew Parker (2026-07-22) questions what 'Slop' is after the…

2026-07-22 · 18:14 UTC ·@andrewparker ·0 min read

Brief

Andrew Parker notes skepticism about the notion of 'Slop' after the Pangram/Substack news and shares a thread by Dmitry Rybin claiming a machine-found refutation of the Dinitz–Garg–Goemans conjecture: a graph with fractional flow cost 58 while every unsplittable flow (capacity violation ≤15) costs at least 60, discovered via a ChatGPT 5.6 Pro transcript.

Why it matters

Author Andrew Parker (2026-07-22) questions what 'Slop' is after the Pangram/Substack announcement and highlights an LLM-produced math result where the human prompts added minimal value.

Key details

  • Dmitry Rybin claims the Dinitz–Garg–Goemans conjecture (open ~30 years) is false: he presents a graph with fractional flow cost 58 while every unsplittable flow with capacity violation <= 15 has cost >= 60.
  • The counterexample was found via a full ChatGPT 5.6 Pro transcript (link: chatgpt.com/share/6a60b2eb-0…), implying the LLM produced novel, high-quality mathematical work.
Source evidence

After the Pangram/Substack announcement, I'm increasingly unsure what Slop even is.

Below is groundbreaking mathematics via a full chatgpt transcript. The human driver's prompts add minimal value. The only thing that makes it not Slop is the quality of the LLM's work.

Dmitry Rybin (@DmitryRybin1)

Dinitz-Garg-Goemans conjecture is false. This graph theory problem was open for ~30 years.

The graph below has fractional flow cost 58. Any unsplittable flow (with capacity violation <=15) has cost at least 60.

Chat with GPT 5.6 Pro where this was found: chatgpt.com/share/6a60b2eb-0…

— https://nitter.net/DmitryRybin1/status/2079904005652893709#m