Can a Readability Reward Model Fix Incomprehensible AI-Generated Math Proofs?
iScienceLuvr · x · 2026-09-20
Responding to mathematicians' complaints that AI-generated proofs are incomprehensible and don't advance mathematical understanding, the author suggests this looks like a tractable problem for AI labs: build a reward model/judge measuring how easy a proof is to understand, then post-train or steer models with it. The thread debates the catch — readability is reader-dependent, formal rigor and intuitive explanation pull in different directions, and an LLM judge may reward proofs that merely sound clear.
More from Models
- NetEase Youdao's Confucius4-R2T2 streaming ASR model trends on Hugging Face — netease-youdao · 2026-09-20
- Similarweb data reveals audience overlap between ChatGPT and Claude — gaganghotra_ · 2026-09-20
- Developer's task-by-task model picks: Fable for coding, DeepSeek for agents — bindureddy · 2026-09-20
- Gemma 26B A4B Aces a C++ Coding Test Locally but Fumbles Tool Calls — HyperWinX · 2026-09-20
- Bonsai 2 quant quietly mauled performance, independent tests confirm — julianharris · 2026-09-20
- After reading all the OpenAI incident reports, a 35-year IT veteran says they prove the opposite of doomsday — DavidLinthicum · 2026-09-20