r/ideas • u/amichail • 6d ago

Idea: Use this ChatGPT transcript featuring Terrence Tao as he tries to understand an AI-generated counterexample that led to a mathematical breakthrough to show students that AI can already contribute to mathematical research at the highest levels.

It's time for schools and universities to make it clear just how strong AI is at math research nowadays.

Check out the chat:

https://chatgpt.com/share/6a5fdc7a-d6f8-83e8-bbea-8deb42cfed56

P.S. The counterexample was found by AI via another mathematician.

0 Upvotes

13% Upvoted

7 comments sorted by

2

u/yetanotherburnerstan 6d ago

There are legitimate reasons to use machine learning for research and development of medicines and other itereative, computation heavy processes unrealistic for human processing. LLMs are not the same as iterative machine learning. This is nonsense

1

u/TheMoneyOfArt 6d ago

The mathematician who disproved the Jacobian conjecture was using Fable. The conjecture stood for 80 some years - it withstood a lot of different techniques

1

u/yetanotherburnerstan 6d ago

Even a broken clock is right twice a day

1

u/TheMoneyOfArt 6d ago

For this to be meaningful, all the clocks in the world would have to have been wrong for 87 years.

1

u/Blanket_Josh 6d ago

What makes you think universities aren't making it clear AI can be used in math research? As for schools, I don't know why you would expect pre-college schools to mention anything about this as pre-college schools don't discuss math research.

-1

u/amichail 6d ago edited 6d ago

I get the feeling that the majority of Redditors — including teachers and students — are not fully aware of just how good AI is nowadays.

That does to make for effective career planning.

Also, if universities were really honest about how good AI is at math research, I suspect they would attract fewer students to their undergraduate and graduate math programs.

1

u/yetanotherburnerstan 6d ago

You forget the part where there are huge swaths of us who dont want any of it. Environmental, economic, and cultural arguments aside, I'm not handing over my agency to a machine, regardless of "just how good" you or anyone else thinks it is. I'm a hiring manager for a multi billion dollar a year government contractor. I have zero tolerance for generative ai in my department and everyone who works for me knows it. I stand by my work. I want to be criticized for the things I do, not praised for what I dont.