The research community is in uproar after OpenAI released a trove of more than 700 mathematical preprints entirely generated by AI on 6 October. The San Francisco, California-based maker of ChatGPT posted the preprints on the software repository Github.

Although some mathematicians celebrated the solution of longstanding problems, others took to social media to complain about being scooped. Some were incensed at what one physicist called a ‘slopocalypse’, even if the mathematical content could end up being formally correct.

  • yeahiknow3@lemmy.worldEnglish
    0·
    2 days ago

    Solving math proofs with an AI is like doing art with a robot. There are practical problems and calculations the AI could solve, but they’re ignoring those to attack the mathematics community and destroy the discipline as a whole.

    This means people will stop sharing work and insights with each other, which has never before been the case.

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldEnglish
      0·
      2 days ago

      I don’t know what you’re trying to say, and I feel like you don’t either.

      This means people will stop sharing work and insights with each other, which has never before been the case.

      That part was clearly, but obviously false on multiple levels

      • yeahiknow3@lemmy.worldEnglish
        0·
        2 days ago

        I’m actually paraphrasing Terence Tao and some of the top mathematicians on the planet: pre-AI, math researchers discussed and shared ideas about their work. Now they are increasingly afraid of getting scooped, and you can see why.

        Non-mathematicians don’t realize this, but proofs aren’t intrinsically valuable outside of what they mean about the community capable of creating them.

        Scientific discoveries without scientists could still be pretty useful to society. Not so about mathematical proofs without mathematicians.

        • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldEnglish
          0·
          2 days ago

          I’m actually paraphrasing Terence Tao

          That doesn’t even mean you’re saying the same thing bud…

          Non-mathematicians don’t realize this, but proofs aren’t intrinsically valuable outside of what they mean about the community capable of creating them.

          Do you think “non-mathematicians” think solving a math problem magically gets someone a check? Like, if anythi g you have it backwards

          You’re way off on everything though.

          You should paraphrase less, wait till after you understand what you’re reading.

          • yeahiknow3@lemmy.worldEnglish
            0·
            2 days ago

            I provided a link. Are you… not able to read?

            What do you think I mean by “valuable” and why would that equal “getting a check”?

            Fucking bizarre. This might be the dumbest conversation I’ve participated in this week.