Kyoko

105 posts

Kyoko banner
Kyoko

Kyoko

@wildlyramified

Katılım Ağustos 2022
242 Takip Edilen13 Takipçiler
Kyoko
Kyoko@wildlyramified·
@wtgowers "Affirm the humanity of authorship": This at least means giving human credit where it is due. AI is influenced by human work, and researchers should actively trace ideas back to the original literature. This can be difficult (e.g., "tricks"), but it is possible in many cases.
English
0
0
2
3.7K
Timothy Gowers @wtgowers
I went to the (great) workshop in Leiden that led to the Leiden Declaration, but ended up not signing it, as it didn't really represent my views, though it wasn't too different either, so the decision wasn't an obvious one. I've explained more in a blog post. Link in next tweet.
English
13
46
369
92.6K
Air Katakana
Air Katakana@airkatakana·
i’m going to post pure math and cs theory that i don’t understand on arxiv and then submit to journals and make the reviewers tell me if it makes sense or not and there’s nothing you can do about it
Gro-Tsen@gro_tsen

Among the very many harms that LLMs are causing to mathematics is the fact that any idiot armed with a ChatGPT/Claude/whatever “pro” subscription thinks they can produce interesting math with their stupid queries. Or even that the output is necessarily correct.

English
38
13
516
37K
autist
autist@litteralyme0·
girls
English
214
1.4K
31.3K
1.4M
Kyoko
Kyoko@wildlyramified·
@TheWattenhofer The counterexample may look simple, but the search space is really huge. Also, being easy to verify does not mean it is easy to find. Surely AI is amazing, but I encourage you to tweet less frivolously.
English
0
0
13
709
Kyoko
Kyoko@wildlyramified·
@teortaxesTex I doubt it. He called computers instruments of the devil in his manuscripts. Dude basically went full Ted Kaczynski in his later years.
English
0
0
1
39
AnyhowAI
AnyhowAI@anyhowbin·
@snowboat84 确实,能搜到已经是很好的思路了,至少理解了自己在做什么。
中文
1
0
3
889
snowboat
snowboat@snowboat84·
昨天有一个大新闻,说A社的数学家用Fable给著名的雅可比猜想找了一个反例,证伪了这个猜想(或者严格地说,是雅可比猜想三维以上的情况)。 今天剧情就反转了。原来极其相似的反例早在1999年就被苏联/俄罗斯数学家Vitushkin构造出来了。Vitushkin构造的是二维的情况,Fable应该是检索到了那篇文章,重新收拾了一下,就变成了三维的情况。 另外雅可比猜想著名的是二维的情况,所以无论当年莫宗坚、张益唐,还是这个Vitushkin,关注的都是二维的问题。三维问题并不是很重要啊。 类似的情况去年openAI也来过一次,信誓旦旦号称原创性地解决了一道埃尔多斯的猜想,结果是检索到的,根本不是自己做出来的。
中文
48
126
1.1K
201.6K
Kyoko
Kyoko@wildlyramified·
@snowboat84 This is not a counterexample. It's a rational map, not a polynomial map. You don't know what you are talking about.
English
0
0
3
263
Kyoko
Kyoko@wildlyramified·
@nihilunbounded This is why AI bros are so annoying, essentially cheering on the disruption of society.
English
2
0
9
691
Kyoko
Kyoko@wildlyramified·
@chenna1985 Stop talking about things you don't know jeet
English
0
0
19
1.4K
Chennakesava Kadapa
Chennakesava Kadapa@chenna1985·
This conjecture is so weak because the only condition on the Jacobian is that the determinant cannot be zero! From the FEM, we know that the inverse mapping fails when the determinant of the Jacobian is negative. If higher order polynomials and non-integer coefficients are allowed its relatively easier to derive such polynomials. Step1: Assume the polynomials with unknown coefficients. Step 2: Calculate the Jacobian matrix and it's determinant. Step 3: Segregate coefficients of terms in the determinant. These are in terms of the unknown coefficients. Step 4: Solve for the unknown coefficients by solving the equations such that all the equations should be equal to zero except the one for the constant term. Set the constant term to any negative value you want. You can use the least squares method with random initialisation. Symbolic solve is expensive. Numerical methods should give close enough approximate values if you want the solution quickly. Step 5: Verify the solution by plugging in the coefficients. Some fields are really overrated!! 🤦🤦
levent@__alpoge__

hello there the jacobian conjecture is false thanx to my close friend akhil for asking about it and my other close friend fable for working during the world cup final ((1+xy)^3 z + y^2 (1+xy) (4+3xy), y + 3 x (1+xy)^2 z + 3 x y^2 (4+3xy), 2 x - 3 x^2 y - x^3 z): \C^3\to \C^3, has jacobian determinant -2, and sends (0, 0, -1/4), (1, -3/2, 13/2), and (-1, 3/2, 13/2) to (-1/4, 0, 0)

English
12
2
32
58.5K
Deva Hazarika
Deva Hazarika@devahaz·
Crazy number of people on my timeline acting as if they’ve ever heard of the Jacobian conjecture before
English
31
24
629
18.6K
Kyoko
Kyoko@wildlyramified·
@devahaz I told a student I'm advising about the news today in our meeting, and he told me he tried finding a counterexample when he was a math undergrad.
English
0
0
1
91
Prakash
Prakash@8teAPi·
Just to take a step back here, Levent had the highest GPA at Harvard, won the top undergrad math research prize and most frequently collaborates with a Fields Medalist. We don’t have enough human mathematicians to ask questions to AI and spend time understanding the results
levent@__alpoge__

hello there the jacobian conjecture is false thanx to my close friend akhil for asking about it and my other close friend fable for working during the world cup final ((1+xy)^3 z + y^2 (1+xy) (4+3xy), y + 3 x (1+xy)^2 z + 3 x y^2 (4+3xy), 2 x - 3 x^2 y - x^3 z): \C^3\to \C^3, has jacobian determinant -2, and sends (0, 0, -1/4), (1, -3/2, 13/2), and (-1, 3/2, 13/2) to (-1/4, 0, 0)

English
42
205
5.8K
395.5K
Kyoko
Kyoko@wildlyramified·
@littmath @eye_of_newton @Jess_Riedel I see. So JC is equivalent to the statement that an etale endomorphism of A^n is an automorphism over a field of char 0.
English
0
0
1
635
Daniel Litt
Daniel Litt@littmath·
This is actually incredible/incredibly funny.
Andy Jiang@davikrehalt

@littmath @__alpoge__ GPT: Take π: P¹ × Sym²(P¹) → Sym³(P¹), (p, {q,r}) ↦ {p,q,r}. R be its ramification divisor; H ⊂ Sym³(P¹) ≅ P³ be hyperplane tangent but not osculating to the small diagonal; X := (P¹ × Sym²(P¹)) \ (R ∪ π⁻¹(H)) ≅ A³; Y := Sym³(P¹) \ H ≅ A³. π|X: X → Y is counterexample

English
15
33
1K
175.9K
Kyoko
Kyoko@wildlyramified·
@littmath @Jess_Riedel You need to explain to us non algebraic geometers why the Jacobian determinant is a constant by construction. Like, does it reduce to some local calculation?
English
2
0
31
9.7K
Kyoko
Kyoko@wildlyramified·
@wtgowers @rperezmarco It is not a bijection on a set-theoretic level. Therefore it has no inverse.
English
0
0
0
245
Timothy Gowers @wtgowers
Timothy Gowers @wtgowers@wtgowers·
@rperezmarco My ignorance is such that I don't see why it's mechanical to check that a multivariate polynomial doesn't have a polynomial inverse. I'm sure there's an easy answer -- I just don't know it.
English
6
1
40
6.2K
Timothy Gowers @wtgowers
Timothy Gowers @wtgowers@wtgowers·
Assuming this is correct, it is for me the first example of an LLM solving a problem not in my area that was nevertheless big enough that I had very definitely heard of it. Again it's a counterexample, so not in "end of mathematics" territory, but still pretty amazing.
levent@__alpoge__

hello there the jacobian conjecture is false thanx to my close friend akhil for asking about it and my other close friend fable for working during the world cup final ((1+xy)^3 z + y^2 (1+xy) (4+3xy), y + 3 x (1+xy)^2 z + 3 x y^2 (4+3xy), 2 x - 3 x^2 y - x^3 z): \C^3\to \C^3, has jacobian determinant -2, and sends (0, 0, -1/4), (1, -3/2, 13/2), and (-1, 3/2, 13/2) to (-1/4, 0, 0)

English
49
128
1.7K
198.4K
Kyoko retweetledi
lyra bubbles
lyra bubbles@_lyraaaa_·
@__alpoge__ fable is losing its mind about this in CoT
lyra bubbles tweet medialyra bubbles tweet media
English
43
38
936
126.7K
Kyoko
Kyoko@wildlyramified·
@Sauers_ What business does a cryptographer have here? They are good at using conjectures, not proving or disproving them.
English
1
0
95
7K
Kyoko
Kyoko@wildlyramified·
@tarunchitra You can't solve the RH. Let's not hype.
English
0
0
1
2K
Tarun Chitra
Tarun Chitra@tarunchitra·
“Wow, we can solve the Riemann hypothesis in silicon. But it is ok, theoretical economics, mechanism design, and game theory are safe” — OP Relatedly, I’ve never seen more math and econ people bouncing from academia at the rate they are now
alz@alz_zyd_

AI is going to make massive progress in pure math, accomplishing decades of human work in the next 2-3 years, and nobody will care because progress in pure math is completely useless

English
12
6
228
33.7K