arXiv:2602.05192cs.AI
To assess the ability of current AI systems to correctly answer research-level mathematics questions, we share a set of ten math questions which have arisen naturally in the research process of the authors. The questions had not been shared publicly until now; the answers are known to the authors of the questions but will remain encrypted for a short time.
Linked by 3 identifiable commenters in 3 comments across 3 threads, from Feb 2026 to May 2026. Found in 3 HN submissions from Feb 2026 to Mar 2026. Open submission discussions.
Perfect match for this test: https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.05192
As a non-mathematician, reading these problems feels like reading a completely foreign language. https://arxiv.org/html/2602.05192v1
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/02/07/science/mathematics-ai-pr... https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/first-proof-is-ai...
Regarding: https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.05192 Introduction The First Proof paper (Abouzaid et al., 2026) aims to evaluate AI capabilities through a set of research-level mathematical problems. While the mathematical content of the questions is not in dispute, the experimental design suffers from significant methodological gaps that undermine the authors' primary conclusions. Specifically, the paper conflates binary outcomes with processual states, lacks independent verification protocols, and…
Connected through shared HN threads, not inferred similarity or a recommendation.
These are different cases, yes? The person in the SA article you link is described as an "amateur", but Timothy Gowers is not an amateur and he is much more capable of guiding an LLM with domain expertise than an amateur. Then there's the kind of problem we're talking about. The…
YeGoblynQueenneView on HNParent context