Nadie lo vio desembarcar en la unánime noche.
Joined November 2013
- Tweets8.8K
- Following461
- Followers982
- Likes14.4K
Quite interesting use of literary references in this talk about AI in math by François Charles
Source : exposé du 5 novembre 2026 dans le cadre du séminaire MIAM
youtube.com/watch?v=nOhZ5-wH…
Sugestão de meta para vc terminar o doutorado:
sobreviver
Sugestão de meta para vc terminar o doutorado:
3 artigos Qualis A1 ou A2
1 artigo internacional
Produtos de dados como scripts, bases e pacotes de R
Pelo menos um dashboard
Pelo menos um sumário Executivo
Pelo menos 4 artigos de opinião em blogs/jornais etc
Pelo menos um prêmio científico.
E aí, anima?
Machines making sign errors. There's really nothing left to us humans
They have withdrawn 3 connected papers “solving” a case of the Hodge conjecture.
One of them had a sign error that invalidated the argument, and with it the other two.
The subscription models can easily find that error. So they rushed to put out a partial result on a Millennium problem without even checking it twice.
That’s the level of care, the seriousness, with which mathematics was approached here.
LLMs are an amazing tool for doing math. But using them like this is just irresponsible.
Also, they have already benchmarked these models on proving big theorems. I’d love to hear what investors think about all of this.
Uma pet sitter me ensinou uma técnica infalível de contenção de gato para dar remédio que simplesmente *não existe na internet*
tjf retweeted
shape rotators vs wordcels in algebraic geometry
ALT In support of his view of Zariski as a geometer for whom modern algebra could provide, at best, only a "temporary accommodation, Weil recalled a well-known anecdote about a conversation at a party between Zariski and Claude Chevalley, a French algebraist who had moved to Princeton from France just before the war. The two men were discussing algebra versus geometry in algebraic geometry when at long last, exasperated, Zariski exclaimed. "But when someone says "an algebraic curve, surely you see something!" "Yes, of course," Chevalley quietly replied. "I see this: f(x.y) = 0."