Math models may have been enough to find Jacobian-style counterexamples all along
dyamins · x · 2026-07-21
The author asks whether it has long been obvious that math models can find the kind of counterexample behind the Jacobian conjecture result. Their argument is that automated tools are naturally good at exhaustively checking simple conditions and pruning infinite search spaces with constraints, while humans often avoid this kind of tedious work. The real surprise, they suggest, is not that a model could help find a counterexample, but that people spent so much effort building theory while still trying to prove the conjecture without enough automated search.
Related event: AI Math Models Already Excel at Exhaustive Counterexample Searches(2 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- A model’s mock oath lists the sins AI should never commit — nptacek · 2026-07-21
- A Baseline Level of Intelligence Could Trigger a Civilization-Wide Burst of Solutions — cgarciae88 · 2026-07-21
- FloC 2026 AIMACS workshop on AI for math and CS set for July 25 — swarat · 2026-07-21
- Repost argues the AI boom should credit the researchers who made it possible — SchmidhuberAI · 2026-07-21
- AI community is abusing the Jevons Paradox label, David Patterson says — davidpattersonx · 2026-07-21
- LLMs are weirdly good at math and coding, and that still feels surprising — paul_cal · 2026-07-21