A new framework splits mathematical correctness into seven separate dimensions
RexDouglass · x · 2026-07-27
- The post argues that formal proofs are fully checkable in a fixed calculus, but ordinary mathematical publishing relies on compressed natural language, diagrams, references, computations, and tacit expertise.
- So the object is deductive, but the certification process is fallible.
- The author proposes separating several notions of correctness: statement validity, proof validity, specification fidelity, dependency integrity, computational reproducibility, independent robustness, and novelty/significance.
- A defect-severity scale is also suggested, ranging from typographical issues to a false main result, with computational irreproducibility and invalid dependencies flagged separately instead of being collapsed into one score.
More from AGI Musings
- 'Refusing to code with AI in 2026 is like refusing Google in 2005' — prasenx · 2026-10-16
- Bessemer survey of 226 healthcare execs: back-office AI returns 3-4x, clinical AI lags — AllThingsApx · 2026-10-16
- SAIR Launches Open Math OS, Offering Free Compute and 100+ Tools for Community-Owned Math AI — Thom_Wolf · 2026-10-16
- 'Human in the loop' called one of AI governance's biggest lies: presence isn't authority — glenbeer · 2026-10-16
- Interpretability debate: 'all concepts are arbitrary' dismissal called the default doomer prior — basedjensen · 2026-10-16
- "Flyers or Liars": the Wright Brothers' 1908 European skeptics as a lens on AI ambition today — bennash · 2026-10-16