Models May Produce Math Proofs Humans Can't Understand — How Far Is RSI?
ctjlewis · x · 2026-10-06
- A widely shared discussion cites reports that people are still trying to understand how a model's forced Navier–Stokes example actually works — i.e., models may produce proofs too complex for humans to follow.
- The poster raises the bigger question: if models can generate uninterpretable proofs, how does that capability translate into AI R&D itself, and how far away is recursive self-improvement (RSI) really?
- Core argument: the implications of rapid AI progress haven't fully landed in the academic community yet.
More from AGI Musings
- FT's Burn-Murdoch: great video explainers are unfalsifiable in real time — jburnmurdoch · 2026-10-06
- MIT team's Science Task Taxonomy maps 232 subfields and 208,202 scientific tasks — JMateosGarcia · 2026-10-06
- Researchers argue for a measured degree of anthropomorphism when describing AI agent behavior — raphaelmilliere · 2026-10-06
- India's holiday crowds may be ChatGPT sending everyone to the same places — paraschopra · 2026-10-06
- Critics Slam AI Agent Science Claims: No Reputational Cost for Wasted Compute — ludwigABAP · 2026-10-06
- Number theory paper credits GPT5.6 and DeepMind's Gemini agent for cracking open problems — felpix_ · 2026-10-06