> All of the latest big proofs were driven by professional human mathematicians steering and priming the models, yes.
False, navier stokes was solved in one shot without steering
False, navier stokes was solved in one shot without steering
I think one of the significant recent proofs was basically just one person saying "solve this" "keep trying" "try harder" until it was done. I believe most of the rest can be assumed to be the human mathematicians at the very least providing some useful guidance.
I agree that it won't be that long before the AIs can do basically everything autonomously, though. I am essentially a Singularitarian when it comes to my outlook, even if not for September 2026.
The bigger question is to what extent did expert mathematicians metaprompt the model with fruitful solution strategies through their sessions finding their way into training data. Answering that question definitively is kind of important for understanding the models contribution/capability. But I feel like people want to turn this into a debate about priority and credit which is sort of secondary