Rohan Paul· @rohanpaul_ai · X·· 4 天前AI 评分64
AI 导读
哈佛大学数学界围绕 OpenAI 的纳维-斯托克斯证明成果产生分歧，讨论焦点在于正确的 AI 证明是否需要人类理解。文章指出数学证明具有确定性与传授技巧双重作用，而无人能懂的 AI 证明虽然能提供确定性却未能传递方法。
正文 · 原文
Harvard mathematicians are split over whether correct AI proofs need human understanding, after OpenAI’s Navier-Stokes claim.
A proof does 2 things: it shows a statement is true, and it teaches other mathematicians a method they can reuse, and AI proofs often deliver only the first.
Mathematicians value proofs for 2 reasons, certainty and technique, and an AI proof that nobody understands gives them certainty while withholding the technique.
来源：Rohan Paul · x.com