• amzd
    link
    fedilink
    356 months ago

    AI is insanely bad at distinguishing fact from hallucination, which seems like a terrible match for math

    • magic_lobster_party
      link
      fedilink
      12
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      The article is about using computers to discover new conjectures (mathematical statements that are not yet known to be true or false). The conjecture can be then later be formally proven (or disproven) by humans.

      Sounds like a good match for me. Formulating conjectures is about finding an interesting pattern and argue that this pattern holds true. Computers are getting increasingly better at pattern matching, so why not use them?

      Title is a bit clickbaity by calling it AI.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        76 months ago

        Title is a bit clickbaity by calling it AI.

        That’s literally every article about “AI”.

        … the London Institute for Mathematical Sciences, of which I am director

        There’s the reason. Self-promotion.

      • @dragontamer
        link
        English
        96 months ago

        No one is talking about automated theorem provers (see 4 coloring theorem) or symbolic solvers (see Mathematica). These tools already revolutionized math decades ago.

        The only thing that came out in the past year or two are LLMs. Which is clearly overhyped bullshit.

        • @[email protected]
          link
          fedilink
          English
          56 months ago

          The article doesn’t mention LLMs, and many ML related things came out in the last year or two that aren’t LLMs.

    • blargerer
      link
      fedilink
      36 months ago

      I haven’t read this article, but the one place machine learning is really really good, is narrowing down a really big solution space where false negatives and false positives are cheap. Frankly, I’m not sure how you’d go about training an AI to solve math problems, but if you could figure that out, it sounds roughly like it would fit the bill. You just need human verification as the final step, with the understanding that humans will rule out like 90% of the tries, but if you only need one success that’s fine. As a real world example machine learning is routinely used in astronomy to narrow down candidate stars or galaxies from potentially millions of options to like 200 that can then undergo human review.