Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

A misalignment of AI in mathematics

mathandai.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 637 posts

Re: A misalignment of AI in mathematics

#131

Post by bz64 »

jeremysalwen wrote: post #20

To me it doesn't seem like what AI has destroyed is the ability for mathematicians to develop understanding and share it with each other, but rather it's destroyed the yardstick (solving open problems) that has traditionally been used to measure how much they have contributed to that understanding. I do see how this is a problem in terms of assigning credit, but I think the cat is already out of the bag in terms of t…

Nothing will be lost if the credit system disappears. History of Science has many examples where wipe outs happen. The chimp brain cant survive without creating elaborate stories about how important it is, more as a cope to its own limitations and what it cant predict or control. Humility is good for health. 3 inch chimp brains didnt create the universe.

Re: A misalignment of AI in mathematics

#133

Post by tossandthrow »

alansaber wrote: post #57
dwa3592 wrote: post #42

While I agree with this and appreciate Tao and other mathematicians to take the time to do this. There are similar concerns for many many other fields aka there is a general misalignment of technology. Take Software engineering for example, I can't believe there is a class of software engineers who wake up everyday and tell themselves, "today is the day I am going to automate the rest of my job". Lets forget the hype…

I doubt taxi drivers were forced to experience an ego death to the same extent

Not being able to feed your family for a large group of people should likely be taken graver.

We will definitely see a large group of people needing therapy, but suggesting that it is worse than people loosing what little they have is poposterous.

Re: A misalignment of AI in mathematics

#134

Post by kccqzy »

vatsachak wrote: post #116
kccqzy wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The usual incentives in academia: publishing papers. Consider the difference between publishing a paper that introduces a novel method to do X, versus publishing a paper that merely interprets Claude’s method to do X. The latter might not even be publishable.

That means that academia is outdated not that LLM math is bad

Okay so you are saying the old incentive structure is outdated. What is the new incentive structure in the LLM era? What exactly makes people want to understand LLM-produced math?

Re: A misalignment of AI in mathematics

#135

Post by jameshart »

jeremysalwen wrote: post #20

To me it doesn't seem like what AI has destroyed is the ability for mathematicians to develop understanding and share it with each other, but rather it's destroyed the yardstick (solving open problems) that has traditionally been used to measure how much they have contributed to that understanding. I do see how this is a problem in terms of assigning credit, but I think the cat is already out of the bag in terms of t…

> destroyed the yardstick … that has traditionally been used to measure how much they have contributed

This goes much broader than mathematics or academia. This is the entire basis via which society distributes its wealth: based on a labour market derived valuation of ‘contribution’.

Re: A misalignment of AI in mathematics

#136

Post by bryan0 »

jonahx wrote: post #37

The concerns seem valid. I'm unclear what the ask is, though. What, even in theory, is a practical and realistic fix?

One proposal that Tao hints at is to not rush to announce solutions. Instead maybe the AI companies should work privately with the subject matter experts on how to communicate the discoveries.

Re: A misalignment of AI in mathematics

#137

Post by picafrost »

Academic research is a marvel because (aside from patents) nobody owns it, in the sense of property. It is given away to be used freely. Researchers want their work used and cited. The primary external reward for publishing is reputation and prestige which translates to remuneration for researchers. And that remuneration can be poor.

Beyond the issue of growing understanding and keeping a bountiful stock of questions to pursue, this scheme seems to be threatened as well.

Re: A misalignment of AI in mathematics

#138

Post by pixelesque »

Other than the fact it's mathematicians signing it, why is mathematics special in this regard: surely this generally applies to a lot of different industries and sectors of research / academia?

Mathematics is being used as a benchmark because there are some high-profile awards in this area I guess, and possibly because 2/3 years ago LLMs were pretty atrocious at it so the level of improvement has been significant.

Re: A misalignment of AI in mathematics

#139

Post by sparkilyshpark »

jonahx wrote: post #37

The concerns seem valid. I'm unclear what the ask is, though. What, even in theory, is a practical and realistic fix?

having labs open their research: what harness system they used, what types of problems they tackled, which problems success and which fail, how they success and fail so we have a better idea of what tasks LLM are currently good at

Re: A misalignment of AI in mathematics

#140

Post by mosura »

bananaflag wrote: post #117
mosura wrote: post #89

If you internalise that AI might actually reach super intelligence then logically the question becomes "so what exactly are humans for if literally everything can be done better by machines?". Then mathematics and all intellectual work, as argued for here, becomes quite clearly a recreational pursuit.

Humans are the one single intelligence that we know which has not been created by another one.

An impressively strong assertion, even by HN Friday standards.
Post reply on HN