| _version_ | 1866902138634895360 |
|---|---|
| author | Thaler, Mario Heinrich |
| author_facet | Thaler, Mario Heinrich |
| contents | <p>This work presents a retrospective on an unusual experiment: allowing artificial intelligence (AI) systems to generate mathematical papers on the Collatz Conjecture and publishing them with minimal human intervention. Unlike conventional research, where AI serves as an assistant to the human author, here the process was inverted. The AI formulated the claims, arguments, and proofs, while my role was primarily that of a mediator and documentarian.</p> <p> </p> <p>Over forty papers were produced in this way, ranging from plausible symbolic frameworks to exaggerated claims of resolution. Three representative cases are highlighted: a symbolic drift framework that was tentatively considered by a mathematics journal, a universal drift invariant erroneously presented as a complete proof (and met with ridicule), and a machine-verifiable pipeline that, though rejected, pointed toward integration with proof assistants.</p> <p> </p> <p>The project did not solve the Collatz Conjecture, but it illuminated how AI generates mathematical narratives, how such narratives can appear persuasive without being rigorous, and how academic culture reacts to them. This retrospective reflects on the experiment as a study in authorship, credibility, and the boundary between speculation and proof in the age of AI.</p> |
| format | Recurso digital |
| id | zenodo_https___doi_org_10_5281_zenodo_17244189 |
| institution | Zenodo |
| language | |
| publishDate | 2025 |
| publisher | Zenodo |
| record_format | zenodo |
| spellingShingle | Proofing Collatz with AI: A Retrospective on an Experimental Publication Process Thaler, Mario Heinrich Collatz Conjecture; artificial intelligence; machine-generated mathematics; symbolic dynamics; proof culture; AI authorship; human–AI collaboration <p>This work presents a retrospective on an unusual experiment: allowing artificial intelligence (AI) systems to generate mathematical papers on the Collatz Conjecture and publishing them with minimal human intervention. Unlike conventional research, where AI serves as an assistant to the human author, here the process was inverted. The AI formulated the claims, arguments, and proofs, while my role was primarily that of a mediator and documentarian.</p> <p> </p> <p>Over forty papers were produced in this way, ranging from plausible symbolic frameworks to exaggerated claims of resolution. Three representative cases are highlighted: a symbolic drift framework that was tentatively considered by a mathematics journal, a universal drift invariant erroneously presented as a complete proof (and met with ridicule), and a machine-verifiable pipeline that, though rejected, pointed toward integration with proof assistants.</p> <p> </p> <p>The project did not solve the Collatz Conjecture, but it illuminated how AI generates mathematical narratives, how such narratives can appear persuasive without being rigorous, and how academic culture reacts to them. This retrospective reflects on the experiment as a study in authorship, credibility, and the boundary between speculation and proof in the age of AI.</p> |
| title | Proofing Collatz with AI: A Retrospective on an Experimental Publication Process |
| topic | Collatz Conjecture; artificial intelligence; machine-generated mathematics; symbolic dynamics; proof culture; AI authorship; human–AI collaboration |
| url | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.17244189 |