logoalt Hacker News

ak_111yesterday at 7:24 PM6 repliesview on HN

Unlike the unit distance problem, the impressive thing here is that it is a proof rather than a counter-example.

However, it seems the proof is extremely concise so it seems that it is exploiting a clever trick that somehow all the experts missed.

So not to dunk on this amazing result (or move the goal post), but it seems now the only achievement that AI hasn't managed in mathematics is presenting an autonomous "theory-building" proof of an open conjecture. That is a proof that requires creating a substantial new theory (developed say in at least 30+ pages) to crack an open problem.


Replies

jvanderbotyesterday at 7:33 PM

It is very concise, and reads precisely as you suggest: to exploit properties already discovered and therefore combined in a novel way.

I'm just delighted by the prose. It reads like an old paper. The ones that were just straightforward theorems with proofs that do exactly what they say.

show 1 reply
qarl2yesterday at 9:15 PM

> However, it seems the proof is extremely concise so it seems that it is exploiting a clever trick that somehow all the experts missed.

Why is that a "however"? My reading is that it found a genuinely new solution that is both elegant and previously missed.

Seems like exactly the kind of result a human mathematician would aspire to.

show 2 replies
moominyesterday at 8:43 PM

For comedy’s sake, I asked ChatGPT 5.5 about the significance of the problem and the chance that 5.6 would solve it with a three page solution. It said close to zero.

I invited it to search the internet and it remains extremely sceptical.

show 1 reply
vessenestoday at 3:01 AM

Grant Sanderson recently distinguished mathematicians that create syntax (he might use the word ontologies in some circles) from those who manipulate it on the Dwarkesh podcast. I liked this delineation a lot. We seem to be at ‘manipulating syntax’.

Creating useful ontologies still seems a ways off here. Not to complain about this awesome result, just to think about where some future goalposts might be laid (and of course complained about / discussed at length when reached)

doogliusyesterday at 7:38 PM

I wonder if in each case they had parallel sessions, one trying to prove, one trying to find a counterexample

throw310822yesterday at 7:35 PM

> seems that it is exploiting a clever trick that somehow all the experts missed.

Exactly, "clever". Isn't that the whole point?

show 1 reply