logoalt Hacker News

libraryofbabelyesterday at 12:17 AM3 repliesview on HN

2026 should be interesting. This stuff is not magic, and progress is always going to be gradual with solutions to less interesting or "easier" problems first, but I think we're going to see more milestones like this with AI able to chip away around the edges of unsolved mathematics. Of course, that will require a lot of human expertise too: even this one was only "solved more or less autonomously by AI (after some feedback from an initial attempt)".

People are still going to be moving the goalposts on this and claiming it's not all that impressive or that the solution must have been in the training data or something, but at this point that's kind of dubiously close to arguing that Terence Tao doesn't know what he's talking about, which to say the least is a rather perilous position.

At this point, I think I'm making a belated New Years resolution to stop arguing with people who are still staying that LLMs are stochastic parrots that just remix their training data and can never come up with anything novel. I think that discussion is now dead. There are lots of fascinating issues to work out with how we can best apply LLMs to interesting problems (or get them to write good code), but to even start solving those issues you have to at least accept that they are at least somewhat capable of doing novel things.

In 2023 I would have bet hard against us getting to this point ("there's no way chatbots can actually reason their way through novel math!"), but here we are are three years later. I wonder what comes next?


Replies

Davidzhengyesterday at 12:49 AM

I think 2026 should see insane progress in AI for math (if not in AI generally)

zozbot234yesterday at 12:33 AM

Uh, this was exactly a "remix" of similar proofs that most likely were in the training data. It's just that some people misunderestimate how compelling that "remix" ability can be, especially when paired with a direct awareness of formal logical errors in one's attempted proof and how they might be addressed in the typical case.

show 2 replies
xigoiyesterday at 12:33 AM

The goalposts are still the same. We want to be able to independently verify that an AI can do something instead of just hearing such a claim from a corporation that is absolutely willing to lie through their teeth if it gets them money.

show 2 replies