Was anyone in the math community aware of the inbound tsunami at the beginning of the year?

Lots. To give an example Terrance Tao was lambasted skeptics on this site for stating it in 2024.

https://unlocked.microsoft.com/ai-anthology/terence-tao/

" I expect, say, 2026-level AI, when used properly, will be a trustworthy co-author in mathematical research, and in many other fields as well.

Then what? That depends not just on the technology, but on how existing human institutions and practices adapt. How will research journals change their publishing and referencing practices when entry-level math papers for AI-guided graduate students can now be generated in less than a day—and with the far better accuracy of future AI tools? How will our approach to graduate education change? Will we actively encourage and train our students to use these tools?

We are largely unprepared to address these questions. There will be shocking demonstrations of AI-assisted achievement and courageous experiments to incorporate them into our professional structures. But there will also be embarrassing mistakes, controversies, painful disruptions, heated debates, and hasty decisions."

He's pretty damn smart that guy.

I was at the workshop that resulted in the Leiden Declaration in Fall 2025. The majority vibe was that this was inevitable, but hard to predict whether it would be in one year or 30 years.

I guess they showed this to the advisory group they created. I guess the group tried reading the work for a day and they could only think of telling them to release the results to the community. I now understand why the group had this suggestion.

I predicted, over 2 years ago, that theorem proving would fall way before other problems that people believe are harder.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41072330

And do any of them actually matter? Will the fact that Noodleheinz's Third Postulate now has a proof affect anyone?