← 返回原文 ↗
Hacker News 熱門精选76

数学与人工智能咨询小组

The Advisory Group on Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence

· 22天前
跳到正文

精选理由

了解数学与人工智能咨询小组，洞察数学研究与AI协作的未来方向。

AI 摘要

文章网址： https://terrytao.wordpress.com/2026/09/21/advisory-group-on-mathematics-and-artificial-intelligence/ 评论网址： https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49791997 得分：8 评论数：0

正文

What's new

Updates on my research and expository papers, discussion of open problems, and other maths-related topics. By Terence Tao

Announcing the Advisory Group on Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence

21 September, 2026 in advertising, math.GM | Tags: AI, Camilo De Lellis, Edward Witten, Francois Charles, Martin Hairer, Melanie Matchett Wood, Nikhil Srivastava, Ravi Vakil, Timothy Gowers, Ulrike Tillman | by Terence Tao

[This is a guest post by the Advisory Group on Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence. This blog post was initially written in a different file format and converted using AI. — T.]

We would like to use this guest post to announce the creation of the Advisory Group on Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence hosted at the Institute for Advanced Study (Princeton) and online at agmai.org.

The rapid advances in artificial intelligence (AI) present both opportunities and challenges for mathematical research. We believe that we are at a historic moment for our discipline. Recent events raise urgent questions about how to support the long-term prospects for deep human understanding of mathematics.

Purpose. The purpose of this group is to advise AI companies on their interactions with mathematical research and with the mathematical community, including the responsible presentation and release of mathematical results. We seek to work for the best interest of mathematics and the mathematical community, and to serve as one possible channel of communication between mathematicians and the AI industry.

Independence, Transparency, and Accountability. This group operates independently of any AI company and members do not accept payment for this work. We will publish our recommendations to AI companies on this website. We are willing to offer such recommendations to any AI company whose models are likely to have a significant impact on mathematics. Although we will give advice, we do not have decision making power at any AI company, and the responsibility for the decisions made by any company will rest with that company.

Advisory Group Members

  • François Charles (ENS-PSL)
  • Camillo De Lellis (IAS, GSSI)
  • Timothy Gowers (College de France, Cambridge)
  • Martin Hairer (EPFL, Imperial College London)
  • Nikhil Srivastava (Berkeley, Simons Institute)
  • Ulrike Tillmann (Oxford, INI)
  • Ravi Vakil (Stanford)
  • Edward Witten (IAS)
  • Melanie Matchett Wood (Harvard)

This group came together after OpenAI approached some of its members about establishing an external advisory board. In agreement with OpenAI, they decided to create an independent group and invite others to join.

Current Task. We are currently facing the very specific challenge of advising OpenAI on how to coordinate the release of a large number of significant results in mathematics that they report have been produced by their internal model.

We welcome input from the mathematical community on this question. Please use this form to share your thoughts with us as soon as possible. Your responses will be used to inform our recommendations and will not be made public without your approval.

Archives

Categories

additive combinatorics AI approximate groups arithmetic progressions Artificial Intelligence Ben Green Cauchy-Schwarz Cayley graphs central limit theorem Chowla conjecture compressed sensing correspondence principle distributions divisor function eigenvalues Elias Stein Emmanuel Breuillard entropy equidistribution Erdos ergodic theory Euler equations exponential sums finite fields Fourier transform Freiman's theorem Gowers uniformity norm Gowers uniformity norms graph theory Gromov's theorem GUE Hilbert's fifth problem ICM incompressible Euler equations inverse conjecture Joni Teravainen Kaisa Matomaki Kakeya conjecture Lie algebras Lie groups Liouville function Littlewood-Offord problem Maksym Radziwill Mobius function Navier-Stokes equations nilpotent groups nilsequences nonstandard analysis Paul Erdos politics polymath1 polymath8 Polymath15 polynomial method polynomials prime gaps prime numbers prime number theorem random matrices randomness Ratner's theorem regularity lemma Ricci flow Riemann zeta function Schrodinger equation Shannon entropy sieve theory structure Szemeredi's theorem Tamar Ziegler ultrafilters universality Van Vu wave maps Yitang Zhang
Unknown's avatar

We are currently facing the very specific challenge of advising OpenAI on how to coordinate the release of a large number of significant results in mathematics that they report have been produced by their internal model.

Will we be told at some point what the nature of these results is?
Also how about them not using mathematics as a benchmark and so that this situation doesn’t arise in the future.

Burt Totaro's avatar

If I thought this was a good thing to do, this would be a great group of people to do it. But I have immediate misgivings. OpenAI has had some very bad publicity, and so they are trying to exploit the trust and respect that these mathematicians command. It is unrealistic to think that this group can change the way OpenAI does business; I don’t need to tell you all the objections that people have raised to that. Is it a good idea to help their crisis management?

DH's avatar

“This group of foxes has invited us to assist them in eating all the chickens as smoothly as possible. We invite suggestions from chickens on how best they can be eaten.”

Unknown's avatar

Hello!

I am a second year PhD student in pure mathematics, and the phrase

“…a large number of significant results in mathematics that they report have been produced by their internal model.”

really disheartens me. Especially without saying how many results and what results. I understand that such advancement are important for mathematics, but my little human brain can’t help but interpret that my time spent on my PhD is going to be a waste of time. Spending 4 years on something that an agent swarm could prove in 1 day, or less.

Forgive my pessimism. I’ve seen a lot of mathematicians talking about the current situation with varying degrees of enthusiasm, ranging from complete rejection of LLMs to unquestionable assimilation in the community.

I believe there’s a lot to be gained by computer assisted maths, but personally, I’m not sure this would be a profession in which I would like to take part in. Vibe-prompting LLMs for answers. But, for better or for worse, future does not follow a set list of rules. I guess only time will tell how things evolve…

I might be giving the impression of a shallow person, and I might as well be one, but the current state of affairs feels overwhelming to me.

I believe this is a reasonable reaction for my career stage, and of course part of human nature. But human nature can easily be decieved. To my mind comes the following paraphrase from Thucydides:

“People always think the greatest war is the one they are fighting at the moment, and when that is over they are more impressed with wars of antiquity”

Maybe everything will turn out to be alright and we’re just in the middle of a proverbial panic attack. But wishful thinking is not enough. Action needs to be taken to preserve what is worth preserving in the community and to amend what can not withstand the future.

Apologies for the long post, and for me “thinking out loud”.

Unknown's avatar

I am extremely wary of AI companies in general and in a gloomy mood as respects the future of the field. I am a nobody working as an electrician in a third world country who could not afford to go to collegue so I study mathematics in my spare time, alone and autonomously. Those are my credentials (somehow worthless, eh).

Anyhow, if this post and initiative are serious, I would advise the group to demand first and foremost a clear statement of the kind of human intervention used in any and all problems (as regards prompting, guidance, false start cleanups, etc) and the resources used (electricity, compute, cooling media, internet access, etc).

Finally, ask politely but strongly that they leave mathematics alone for the time being, since the way in which they are abusing the field to foster their reputation is absolutely disgusting.

Unknown's avatar

OpenAI wants to use the math problem-solving capability of their AI model for PR purposes, since they see it as a way to boost their upcoming IPO. Do you want to help them with this PR?

Unknown's avatar

This is surely just a Trojan horse?

Unknown's avatar

I thought we finally agreed that OpenAI’s interest (and in general all AI companies) and the Maths community’s interest were somehow orthogonal, but here we go again.

Not surprised if next month we read a headline like “9 top mathematicians say OpenAI is the best ….”

Unknown's avatar

I think it’s good that these results will be made public. I want them to disclose a couple of things: what problems did they try? What was the methodology towards obtaining these results? What was the chain of thought behind these results?

Regarding the best way to make public, I think they should contact experts at the specific problems they solved and give them time to write up something or delegate that task to their students/postdocs. I think in the future this company should stay away from the frontlines of research mathematics.

Unknown's avatar

Open AI is a big company, and the primary goal of the task force should be to get some guarantee that their recommendation will be seriously considered by someone with actual decision making power. Open AI has already hired many mathematicians, including a fresh Fields medalist, and were perfectly OK with crossing every boundary imaginable when Navier-Stokes was in sight.


Leave a comment Cancel reply

For commenters

To enter in LaTeX in comments, use $latex <Your LaTeX code>$ (without the < and > signs, of course; in fact, these signs should be avoided as they can cause formatting errors). Also, backslashes \ need to be doubled as \\.  See the about page for details and for other commenting policy.

Blog at WordPress.com.Ben Eastaugh and Chris Sternal-Johnson.

%d
    查看原文（Hacker News 熱門）