2 ms·
note HEAVILY > The students heavily utilized AI assistants, specifically Claude Opus 5 and GPT-5.6 Sol, for computational exploration, proof idea generation, a
by random3 12d ago
note HEAVILY
> The students heavily utilized AI assistants, specifically Claude Opus 5 and GPT-5.6 Sol, for computational exploration, proof idea generation, and editing.
this is a bit like Enhanced Olympics(https://www.enhanced.com https://www.enhanced.com), except that you have someone else compete for you.
My issue is that it makes it hard to distinguish real insight/work etc. from effectively null one.
An old instance of the same issue was with what was called "script kiddie" back in the 90-00s
- gus_massa 12d agoFor short problems the LLM are just too good now, but for long problems they still get in trouble. It's like bicycle or F1 race. It goes faster, but you still have to steer the boat to reach somewhere. (Or probably something in between, like a motorcycle race.) Also, the "kids" were guide by a postdoc, not completely on their own.
- karmakaze 12d agoDifference being anyone can be a "script kiddie". I don't think anyone could direct an AI to proofs like this one.
- dist-epoch 12d ago> Jarred Sumner, an Anthropic staff member (and non-mathematician), prompted Claude to "take a real stab" at the hypothesis itself, leaving the mathematical choices from there up to the model. ... Throughout this process, Jarred's input was mostly limited to sending Claude messages of encouragement (mostly variants of "keep going" or "believe in yourself"). This seems to have helped Claude overcome some initial skepticism that it could make meaningful progress. https://www.anthropic.com/research/riemann-zeta https://www.anthropic.com/research/riemann-zeta