Genuine question - this is so hard for me to follow. Not that I could follow the original disproof anyways. But how is "truth" determined when the effort required to validate is so high?
gpt5•57m ago
It's a common problem in math. The famous proof for Fermat's last theorem took 2 years to validate.
auggierose•45m ago
That's different though. Understanding the spec of Fermat's last theorem is simple. Here, you already need to know some mathematics just to understand the spec.
kikokikokiko•56m ago
These AI generated proofs have something akin to the quantum algorithms that can generate a response that would take 1 billion years of processing to finish on a classical computer. How do you test them to see if the result was correct?
JellyYelly•1h ago
The author of this paper has also apparently published a proof of the Riemann Hypothesis. yeah idk if they should be trusted as an authority on this.
Crank author at a crank “institution” - I can’t assess whether the OpenAI paper is accurate but I highly doubt this is going to be the paper to disprove it.
toinewx•1h ago
does this show Lean is not bulletproof?
Tiberium•1h ago
This "paper" itself is 100% AI-generated...
ofjcihen•58m ago
What makes you say that? Not dunking, I skimmed it (I’m in no way at this level) and didn’t see anything outright Claud-y.
Maybe there's an error, but much of this write-up reads like nonsense to me. The assertion that a semidirect product with an abelian factor must admit that factor in its center is absolutely false. This is actually acknowledged later in this article, but is handwaved away in incomprehensible fashion.
OsrsNeedsf2P•1h ago
gpt5•57m ago
auggierose•45m ago
kikokikokiko•56m ago