Google DeepMind says LLMs can prove theorems but still cannot make scientific “jumps”
kylekabasares · x · 2026-07-28
Google DeepMind argues LLMs still lack the “jump” needed for scientific discovery
The post discusses a DeepMind paper that reframes scientific discovery as a cycle: sensory experience → intuitive leap to axioms → logical deduction. The paper argues that current generative AI has largely mastered:
- Induction: pattern matching over massive data
- Deduction: formal reasoning and theorem proving
But it still lacks abduction — the non-logical leap that creates new explanatory hypotheses.
Using Einstein’s notes on discovery and his formulation of general relativity as a case study, the paper argues that today’s LLMs may be able to prove consequences from given premises, but are structurally unable to invent the premises themselves. It also claims that the bottleneck in artificial scientific invention is translating simulation into formal axioms, and suggests physically grounded multimodal world models may be needed to bridge that gap.
Related event: DeepMind Paper: LLMs Lack the 'Intuitive Leap' for Scientific Discovery(7 posts)→
More from AGI Musings
- Did Altman already secretly claim OpenAI hit AGI? Netizens dig through old interviews — RileyRalmuto · 2026-09-23
- Mathematician Elliot Glazer argues OpenAI should "slop drop" all its math results rather than hide them — burny_tech · 2026-09-23
- Grady Booch doubts AI's Navier-Stokes claim: insights may come from human experts — Grady_Booch · 2026-09-23
- Grady Booch: Contemporary AI Still Lacks Abductive Reasoning, Just 'Next-Token Prediction' — Grady_Booch · 2026-09-23
- AI solves Navier-Stokes-related problem as machines upend mathematics, New Scientist reports — burny_tech · 2026-09-23
- Mathematician says OpenAI likely proved a significant partial case of the Hodge conjecture — burny_tech · 2026-09-23