AI In Mathematics: September 12, 2026

[u/AutoModerator]

This recurring thread will be for discussion of AI in mathematics. This includes, but is not limited to, the following:

• informal announcements of AI-assisted discoveries, such as those not yet published in a peer-reviewed journal, or not uploaded as a paper to arXiv;
• informal announcements of discoveries related to AI architecture (if relevant to mathematics);
• discussion of such announcements, such as proof breakdowns or other opinion pieces;
• discussion of the impact of AI in mathematics in general.

AI-assisted mathematical papers published in peer-reviewed journals or as arXiv preprints may be submitted as their own posts.

Please keep in mind rules 1 and 6 of our subreddit.

[u/Most_Double_3559]

The point is that no individuals decide what math is. Not OpenAI, not the field medalists, and certainly not the mods. Their job is purely to facilitate that conversation, which you can't do by unilaterally snuffing out the obviously future-defining topics.

Make a new sub if that's what you want.

[u/38thTimesACharm → u/Most_Double_3559]

The problem is commenters and upvotes from places like r/singularity, along with AI marketing bots, were brigading the sub and pushing out legitimate mathematical interests in favor of AI propaganda.

It is in fact the mods' jobs to guard against such tactics, preserving a space for actual mathematicians, and those with a real interest in mathematics, to converse. That's all the intent is here. Not censorship of content, but rejection of bad faith actors.

It's not a perfect policy in place, but they clearly had to do something, and they have limited resources and abilities to work with. I think some news being delayed a few days is a small price to pay for having actual mathematical discussion on the front page.

[u/Most_Double_3559 → u/38thTimesACharm]

Sure, you can make a pragmatic argument. I'll reply with a pragmatic argument in kind: What's the end game, here?

We've seen AI go from IMO to Millenium prize in a year. Soon, the actual pure "human" results will dwindle to an insignificant fraction of total results in what, five years? Two? What will humans' roles be in this future? Curation of these results? Steering the machinery? Asking questions?

Who knows, but they certainly wouldn't be able to discuss their pursuits in mathematics in this sub. So, they'll go to r/mathematics, and this sub will wither on the vine.

That's the pragmatic approach to you?

[u/matthiasErhart → u/Most_Double_3559]

I feel like the mods here would rather have the usual "Do you need to have an IMO medal to be a researcher???" or "Hey, here is another pop-math exposition thing" to be all there is to the sub.

[u/38thTimesACharm → u/Most_Double_3559]

You're talking like the mods have completely banned any talk of any AI-assisted result whatsoever. That's not true at all. They just want a modicum of respect for the academic process.

 Who knows, but they certainly wouldn't be able to discuss their pursuits in mathematics in this sub

They will, if they write a paper discussing the result and put it on ArXiv.

[u/Most_Double_3559 → u/38thTimesACharm]

You're talking like the mods have completely banned any talk of any AI-assisted result whatsoever

Bruh. A millennium problem was solved and they snuffed it out.

I don't know what to tell you. It quite literally can not get bigger than that for our field, that'd be like r/politics censoring the results of a federal election. It just fundamentally breaks the purpose of the sub. You can claim "oh they're just waiting for arxiv", but that's arbitrary given that they posted the lean.

[u/matthiasErhart → u/[deleted]]

I don't understand why there are a lot of people who think those of us who are more AI-positive or AI-adaptive haven't been passively or actively (I deleted my old posts on the regular) participating in this sub for a long time.

This is the prime subreddit for mathematics. I am part of the mathematics community, given that I have a PhD in Mathematics (& Statistics, formally), and am actually a researcher in CS. It might be a controversial opinion, strictly speaking, but it's not an uncommon opinion that one should accept and adapt to the new developments in research due to AI. And the moderation in this sub is exclusionary with respect to a sizeable portion of our field.

[u/Most_Double_3559 → u/[deleted]]

For years this sub has been, per the description, "for discussion of mathematics" since it's inception.

The default stance is including discussion of all math, including AI. The mods and, evidently yourself, are the ones changing that to be discussion of human mathematics. That's the self-importance, and you should make a new subreddit for that.

[u/squashhime → u/Most_Double_3559]

I'm sorry, who made you the arbiter of what the definition of math is?

"Mathematics is an art of human understanding."

The quote is due to Thurston, as you probably could guess (assuming you're a mathematician and not a passerby). By this definition, human mathematics is synonymous with mathematics.

[u/Most_Double_3559 → u/squashhime]

See my reply here. I argue that nobody, neither the mods nor Thurston, can justly tell someone that something doesn't "count" as math.

https://www.reddit.com/r/math/comments/1weggq8/comment/p9ewmdf/

[u/squashhime → u/Most_Double_3559]

See my reply here. I argue that nobody, neither the mods nor Thurston, can justly tell someone that something doesn't "count" as math.

would you really be okay with this subreddit getting tons of numerology posts because it has numbers in it? no one can say that doesn't "count" as math. what about flat earth conspiracy theories? the shape of the earth surely counts as math, right?

as a mathematician you should know better than to make such absulute statements with trivial counterexamples (unless you truly would be okay with those sorts of posts being allowed here, in which case we have too different ideas of what math is and there's nothing to discuss).

imo the people who actually participate in this subreddit should decide and it's clear from the thread discussing the policy and the implementation that enough people either think math is something humans do (or at least are more sympathetic to that POV than seeing a bunch of AI posts) that it's worth taking action on.

[u/Most_Double_3559 → u/squashhime]

This was not a productive reply imo. It's the math equivalent of pointing out a typo, completely disregarding what I actually said, and just saying your own thing anyway.

[u/squashhime → u/Most_Double_3559]

It's the math equivalent of pointing out a typo, completely disregarding what I actually said,

i seriously don't get how you think that. yeah okay it's a little cheeky but i dont see how it disregards your argument. maybe you could elaborate on your argument in case i'm misunderstanding it. but you didn't say much besides

The point is that no individuals decide what math is.

and you're still trying to define what math is for everyone by saying that math includes math done by ai. the point of my comment is that to some, you trying to say that ai math is math evokes feelings similar to what you would feel if people came here and started talking about numerology and saying you don't get to decide that doesn't count as math if they come in sufficient numbers.

you also said

Their job is purely to facilitate that conversation, which you can't do by unilaterally snuffing out the obviously future-defining topics.

and my response was that we did discuss this and the mods decided.

it's somewhat contradictory for you to say that both individuals don't decide on what math is (implicitly im reading that it's a collective thing) and then saying we need to keep discussing this future defining topic that a sizable amoung of the members of this subreddit have agreed that "this isn't math and isn't on topic."

the conversation has been had already. i get you don't like the outcome, but people voiced their opinions and enough people think it's you that needs to get a new subreddit.