At the risk of grossly oversimplifying current frontier models, it makes a lot of sense that a lot of problems in math are low hanging fruit for AI. We’ve had proof systems for a long time, but now an LLM can translate words to math and evaluate the worth of a line of inquiry. It is in many ways a reflection of AlphaGo a decade ago, using search within rules, and model for the intuition that guides it. Likewise, a lot of what made up my non ML AI class was defining constraints and implementing A*, then putting a little learned heuristic into it. Now I guess we also use a model to learn the constraints (e.g. the math definitions). Yes, I know there is more to it (at least from my understanding of Deepseek V4, as I don’t know for certain what OAI has actually implemented internally), but this thread of where this came from makes sense to me.
We’re working with an independent advisory group of mathematicians to help OpenAI responsibly share advances in AI and mathematics.
The group will advise on how we assess and communicate new mathematical results, uphold academic and professional standards, and build tools that support mathematical research and learning.
Through this work, we want mathematicians to be at the center of shaping how AI supports mathematical understanding and how its benefits reach the wider community.
openai.com/index/advisory-gr…