| ▲ | OutOfHere 3 hours ago | |
The obvious answer is to have mathematicians use AI to: 1. Help understand, check, and explain the results. 2. Write new works explaining or refuting the new approaches and results in more lucid language. 3. Advance the field further. I don't know why this is not obvious. Each step is intended to support human understanding, not to replace it. Any mathematicians who don't do these will be left behind, and if none do it, the field of human mathematics itself will become obsolete. All I am hearing so far is excuses. | ||
| ▲ | Danox 16 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | |
In certain fields if you are talented and just starting out, you have better do any work that’s important to you offline for privacy/pirate reasons I really can’t say that enough, those AI model companies are not even remotely your friend. | ||
| ▲ | j2kun 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
AI is producing works that are so poorly written/explained that it requires AI to even parse the results, which in turn produces explanations that are still confusing. In fact, it seems the humans are required to understand and explain the results, and the fact that they need to use AI to do so is a shortcoming of AI. And if humans decide to give up on mathematics because the process of using the machine is so tedious, then there will be no value in automated theorem proving. | ||
| ▲ | aeturnum 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
You can certainly do that - but it's quite the break from tradition to release a paper in the state described. Why they did is a really interesting question! It may be that AI math requires approaches that humans don't find intuitive and what you are describing is actually counter productive (because, in summarizing the work in a way humans understand, you're removing the context an AI would use to further the work an AI did). It also might be that OpenAI could have done that and chose not to - or maybe they tried and this was the best they could do. No matter what I don't think anything about how to react to a paper being released in this state is obvious. | ||
| ▲ | qingcharles 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |
Isn't AI well-suited to tasks #1 and #2, though? #3 at this point might need more human intuition; but that might be a 2026 problem. | ||