logoalt Hacker News

autuni • today at 9:24 AM • 2 replies • view on HN

The difference is that human mathematicians wouldn't post it online, claim they have achieved some proof, and then check after publication and announcing the results to the world. You would always check your work first, then publish it. It's not about preprint vs peer-reviewed. That of course is normal practice, it's the high-profile claims that are being made that are the problem here. They just blindly published results produced by the LLM, with 0 due diligence.


Replies

gorgolo • today at 10:20 AM

Yes they would, in many fields it is (was?) normal to post a preprint and leave it up for the next year while the handful of other people working on the topic digest it and agree on whether it’s right or not, before even submitting to a journal. Sometimes the others would find an isssue in an argument and you hopefully manage to fix it or potentially retract / not submit to a journal.

➕ show 1 reply
petesergeant • today at 12:09 PM

> is that human xs wouldn't y

This is wrong for a strikingly large percentage of xs and ys