logoalt Hacker News

Classification of Finite Simple Groups Formalized in Lean

155 points • by pfdietz • today at 4:29 PM • 40 comments • view on HN

Comments

Davidzheng • today at 11:18 PM

Makes me sad that the homotopical foundation people never got their shit together and now formalization is so mature but it's still done in set theoretic foundations.

➕ show 1 reply
mlmonkey • today at 4:37 PM

Out of curiosity: is it possible to take a frontier model and just let it loose on all math textbooks out there, converting each and every proof/theorem/lemma/etc. into Lean? A frontier model should be able to do that, right? And it's a one-time task: do it once and it's there for eternity, available as a library to be used in other proofs.

Maybe my understanding of Lean is wrong; I'm thinking of it as a programming language but for Math.

➕ show 5 replies
sebzim4500 • today at 4:32 PM

This seems like a very good use of auto-formalization, because in the past mathematicians have incorrectly believed that they were finished with the classification only discover a missing class/sporadic group.

The original proof was a collaboration of ~100 mathematicians, if Tao is correct then we should expect to see more such collaborations in the future like we do in e.g. physics.

➕ show 1 reply
compacct27 • today at 8:40 PM

Groups were my gateway drug into abstract algebra. A friend clued me into symmetry being everywhere and Groups are how symmetry is formalized, and it’s been a crazy journey understanding all that. The frontier models can tie those abstract concepts to plain English examples and answer questions decently well, it’s never been a better time to pick up the field solo and see what it has to offer us

sleepyams • today at 10:16 PM

Somehow the classification of finite simple groups makes me feel uneasy as a mathematician, but I suppose this helps quell that feeling.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monster_group

➕ show 1 reply
vessenes • today at 10:41 PM

Note they found one gap (and filled it) in the previously accepted 1,000+ page proof. So that's pretty cool.

senderista • today at 7:49 PM

Filling in well-known gaps like this is the kind of thing the AI companies should be doing, not trying to scoop research in progress.

pfdietz • today at 4:29 PM

The formalization is 43.1M lines of Lean.

➕ show 1 reply
vatsachak • today at 4:52 PM

LLM formalization is not as useful as human formalization, but nice to know that the Classification is correct

pixl97 • today at 4:38 PM

Page has some kind of redirect bug that steals the back button, may want to open it in a new tab to avoid that.

QuesnayJr • today at 5:28 PM

I'm surprised they only found one gap. I would have expected multiple (fixable) gaps would have been uncovered, especially since the result was spread over many papers by many different people.

➕ show 2 replies
esafak • today at 8:02 PM

Looking at the visualizations made me wonder if the embeddings themselves can be used to suggest, if not derive, mathematical results. I realize it depends on the quality of the embeddings.

Salparvezml • today at 5:22 PM

[flagged]

v3ai • today at 5:10 PM

based if true