I find your English pretty ambiguous. It's not clear to me if, for example,
what you mean when you say:

*"I think that the research reinforces that solve or simplify, or integral
is losing competition*.

*Because a lot of them are written with heuristics that won't win with AI,"*
Do you mean that Sympy is losing competitiveness or attractiveness?



On Sun, Aug 18, 2024 at 7:34 PM Sangyub Lee <sylee...@gmail.com> wrote:

> AI achieves silver-medal standard solving International Mathematical
> Olympiad problems - Google DeepMind
> <https://deepmind.google/discover/blog/ai-solves-imo-problems-at-silver-medal-level/>
>
> Recently, Google had announced the result that their AI model, AlphaProof
> and AlphaGeometry can silver medal in IMO problems. Their system is hybrid
> of symbolic models, and uses proof assistant Lean as backend, which
> guarantees that the proof can be verified automatically.
> ChatGPT had many problems that it can hallucinate the steps of proof, and
> keep human verifying their result, as well as understaing the steps, so
> expressing proof as formal proof statements is a gain.
>
> I think that the research reinforces that solve or simplify, or integral
> is losing competition. Because a lot of them are written with heuristics
> that won't win with AI, and we also have concerns about code around them
> are getting messy.
>
> I think that if we want to avoid the losing competition, and make AI
> systems work collaborative, symbolic computation should be focused to solve
> only a few 'formal' problems in 100% precision and speed.
>
> I already notice that there is research to connect Wu's method to
> AlphaGeometry
> [2404.06405] Wu's Method can Boost Symbolic AI to Rival Silver Medalists
> and AlphaGeometry to Outperform Gold Medalists at IMO Geometry (arxiv.org)
> <https://arxiv.org/abs/2404.06405>
> Although symbolic system would no longer competitive solution to general
> math problems, the 'formal' symbolic systems can still be valued. (I also
> hear that AlphaGeometry2 is using Wu's method, but I'm trying to verify the
> sources)
>
> I also think that such advances in AI systems can raise concerns about
> software engineering careers, or educational system, which may be
> interesting for some readers in the forum.
>
> For example, math exams can be pointless in the future, even to identify
> and train good science or engineers in the future, because trained AI
> models can beat IMO. I think that in AI age, the education should change,
> such that it is not bearing through boring and repetitive systems, which
> does not even reflect the capability of future engineers or scientists.
>
> Also, I notice that software engineering is changing, because AI models
> can complete a lot of code, and precision is improving, or people are
> improving the skills of prompting.
> It also seems to be deprecating code sharing efforts for open source
> communities, because code can be generated rather than shared.
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "sympy" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to sympy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To view this discussion on the web visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/e7898bdb-d1e4-49fd-94c7-66ba8a840511n%40googlegroups.com
> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/e7898bdb-d1e4-49fd-94c7-66ba8a840511n%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer>
> .
>


-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Then maybe we are gods after all,....
baby gods only just now waking up to our true power

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sympy" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to sympy+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/sympy/CABnCOkxzkTvML%3D2mH5ZRcmHye1ubo_uj2wSpMEX266tB_z4COQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to