We could continue paying mathematicians if we want. But what we (likely eventually) can’t do is restore their ability to make new discoveries with their minds, to receive credit for that and know their efforts contributed to knowledge. There appear to be folks who have spent decades at work on certain problems, in part based on a reasonable belief that they have a comparative advantage in their area. And within a short time, the situation is radically changed and they are transformed from an aspiring Mozart to an aspiring Salieri, only able to appreciate and perhaps help explain to others the accomplishments of AI.
perhaps help explain to others the accomplishments of AI
But at this too they would be outmatched shortly. What remains?
Integrity, trustworthiness, knowledge of their intent, commitment to some ideals.
AIs having capabilities and using them to achieve goals you know and agree with are not the same thing. Yes, this AI can persuade me that I understand this math fact, but did it do it in a valid way?
at the moment, at doesn’t do even that. mathematicians are still the meaning makers with respect to mathematics. the LLM can craft a path from A to B, but cannot say “this is not babble. this is meaningful, both now, and in the future of this language game we call mathematics which has such mysterious use in describing the world in which we live.”
math autoresearch does appear to be of its own special kind. still requiring “research taste” (the forecasting of profitable areas of proof space exploration) without “experiments” beyond actual proof construction and lean formalization. AI experiment design needs to be much more sophisticated to extract actual knowledge. makes one sympathetic to the world model advocates.
What is it that AI takes from mathematicians, when it does all the math? The paid position of mathematician disappears.
What is stopping them from doing it is the absence of opportunity to dedicate one’s life to its study.
We could continue paying mathematicians if we want. But what we (likely eventually) can’t do is restore their ability to make new discoveries with their minds, to receive credit for that and know their efforts contributed to knowledge. There appear to be folks who have spent decades at work on certain problems, in part based on a reasonable belief that they have a comparative advantage in their area. And within a short time, the situation is radically changed and they are transformed from an aspiring Mozart to an aspiring Salieri, only able to appreciate and perhaps help explain to others the accomplishments of AI.
But at this too they would be outmatched shortly. What remains?
Integrity, trustworthiness, knowledge of their intent, commitment to some ideals.
AIs having capabilities and using them to achieve goals you know and agree with are not the same thing. Yes, this AI can persuade me that I understand this math fact, but did it do it in a valid way?
Alignment is key to this.
at the moment, at doesn’t do even that. mathematicians are still the meaning makers with respect to mathematics. the LLM can craft a path from A to B, but cannot say “this is not babble. this is meaningful, both now, and in the future of this language game we call mathematics which has such mysterious use in describing the world in which we live.”
So you are moved up a level of abstraction. How much time does that give you? :(((
math autoresearch does appear to be of its own special kind. still requiring “research taste” (the forecasting of profitable areas of proof space exploration) without “experiments” beyond actual proof construction and lean formalization. AI experiment design needs to be much more sophisticated to extract actual knowledge. makes one sympathetic to the world model advocates.