Many "serious" mathematicians are aghast
Mathematicians are debating the role of AI in generating mathematical proofs and the limitations of the current peer-review system. The discussion questions whether traditional gatekeeping is necessary or if a more open, marketplace-style verification is superior.
Why it matters
This reflects a broader shift in scientific and academic rigor as AI tools begin to challenge established institutional workflows.
Daniel Lemire on X: "We are getting all of these new mathematical solutions generated with the assistance of AI. They get published on blogs, on X, and so forth.
Many “serious” mathematicians are aghast.
“They should publish in (human) peer-reviewed journals, so we know what is true and what is false.”
The current peer-review model, I should remind you, is a recent invention from the second half of the twentieth century. We had the whole Scientific Revolution and the incredible first half of the twentieth century without it. How did you find out, in 1880 or 1920, that something “was true”? Same as always.
https://t.co/7PqRMdEH76 check it yourself. If you are capable of rerunning the experiments, you do. If it is mathematics, you read over the arguments critically.
Get smarter about the news
Sign up free for a feed built around what you actually care about, Dive Deeper research on any story, and the full text of every article.
Create free accountAlready have an account? Sign in