Mathematician Litt: Paper Errors Mostly From Badly Propagated Edits, Not Deep Flaws
littmath · x · 2026-08-27
In his thread on AI-assisted review of his papers, mathematician Daniel Litt explains that all but one of the errors in his first long paper stemmed from doing a bad job propagating edits while optimizing results — a common way errors creep in. The issues were missing technical hypotheses (e.g. projectivity or reducedness) that a careful reader would likely infer were intended, but which still must be fixed.
More from Research
- Hannah Fry: How OpenAI has triggered an existential crisis in mathematics — AnnaCiaunica · 2026-10-15
- Watching AI evaluation shift from offline benchmarks to online eval — vboykis · 2026-10-15
- StartLux-Decision debuts RL-trained calibrated decision models, 27B scores 72.8 — startlux-models · 2026-10-15
- A third of all math preprints in 9 months were written with AI, researcher says — IgorCarron · 2026-10-15
- AAAI/ACM AIES paper interviews 15 data scientists on why responsible AI practice is hard to sustain — ChinasaTOkolo · 2026-10-15
- Schmidt Sciences awards $10M to 19 AI humanities research teams — OdedRechavi · 2026-10-15