o3
Article
o3 is a recurring person in the Astral Codex Ten archive, appearing 2 times across 2 issues between May 29, 2025 and June 26, 2025. The archive places it in contexts such as “are you listening o3?”; “I excluded two studies that o3 said had good data, but where it couldn’t explain its sources well enough to satisfy me”. It most often appears alongside GMU, o3, ACX Grants.
Metadata
- Category: People
- Mention count: 2
- Issue count: 2
- First seen: May 29, 2025
- Last seen: June 26, 2025
Appears In
- Sorry, I Still Think MR Is Wrong About USAID
- Missing Heritability: Much More Than You Wanted To Know
Related Pages
-
- GMU (2 shared issues)
-
- o3 (2 shared issues)
-
- ACX Grants (1 shared issues)
-
- ACX subreddit (1 shared issues)
-
- Africa (1 shared issues)
-
- Aftab (1 shared issues)
-
- AIDS (1 shared issues)
-
- Alex Young (1 shared issues)
-
- Arthur Jensen (1 shared issues)
-
- Awais Aftab (1 shared issues)
-
- behaviorism (1 shared issues)
-
- Biobank (1 shared issues)
External Links
Source Context
Recovered passages from the original issue text. When the raw archive preserved outbound links inside the source passage, they are listed directly under the quote.
Scott could have simply asked me how [Mercatus overhead] works. It is also the case that we do not receive or seek federal government research funding, but if we did the overhead going to GMU would be zero (are you listening o3?). Depending on the exact source of the funding, very likely we would make a lot of money on such grants because we would receive significant “overhead” payments for what would not be actual overhead expenses. That is one big problem with the system, I might add. We at Mercatus have made the judgment that we do not wish to become institutionally/financially addicted to such overhead…and I wish more non-profits would do the same.
Swedish National Sample: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41380-022-01500-2/tables/2, Table 2B, first column, second and third rows. 11I made this table with the help of the o3 AI. It gave me a longer list of seven studies, but admitted that many of them didn’t list heritabilities and it was calculating them itself based on other statistics that were reported. In some cases, I was able to replicate its calculations; in others, it seemed to be hallucinating the relevant numbers, or had calculations complicated enough that I couldn’t prove that it wasn’t. I excluded two studies that o3 said had good data, but where it couldn’t explain its sources well enough to satisfy me. These were Kendler et al 2015 (o3 claimed heritability of 0.5 - 0.6) and Capron & Duyme 1989 (o3 claimed heritability of 0.4). Here are sources for the remaining: Texas adoption: https://gwern.net/doc/genetics/heritable/adoption/2021-loehlin.pdf , Table 6 . Heritability = 2*correlations. The first row of the table lists three parent-child IQ correlations (IQBM): 0.3, 0.34, and 0.35. I took the median, 0.34, and doubled it to 0.68.