💥 Thrilled to share my new essay "A New Dawn For Mathematical Progress" out today in @NoemaMag! Read the essay here: As frontier AI systems solve some of the most difficult open questions in mathematics such as the Millennium Prize problems, many fear human mathematicians are becoming obsolete. I argue that whether AI ends human mathematics or begins its golden age depends on which of two models of "mathematical progress" we embrace: the checklist model or the generative encounter model. Right now, the impacts of AI systems on mathematics has left the mathematical community in deep disorientation. A PhD student recently wrote of a "profound spiritual crisis"; a Fields medalist called for "new theories of care and love." These reactions make sense under the checklist model, where progress consists of resolving well-defined, pre-specified problems (Olympiads, famous conjectures, Millennium Prizes) to crown lone human heroes. However, the checklist model was always a narrow view; one that elevated "pure" math as the only "real" math, while treating "applied" math as secondary. As the mathematician George Dantzig once said: "I consider myself a mathematician. I don’t differentiate between pure mathematics and applied mathematics." History shows that so much of our richest math comes from the generative encounter model on which mathematics makes breakthroughs when human mathematicians tackle complex and messy real world problems. If we embrace the generative encounter model of mathematical progress, a golden age of mathematics, rooted in human purpose & new visions of education & collective reward, may have just begun.

“In a three-month randomized controlled trial with practicing patent attorneys, we found that, while routinely using AI lifts work quality across the board, its effects on on-the-job learning depend on seniority: senior lawyers who used AI for 90 days demonstrate stronger judgment than those who didn’t, whereas junior lawyers show no average skill gain, their scores splitting into more strong scores and more low scores.”

Who owns the benefits of AI? In this essay I co-authored with @IasonGabriel for the DeepMind Institute, we offer four moral arguments — grounded in rights, reciprocity, fairness, and beneficence — that together make the philosophical case that the benefits of AI should reach everyone. Read the piece here and let us know what you think:

I'm thrilled about the launch of the DeepMind Institute (DMI). As a member, I look forward to driving grounded, rigorous, and multidisciplinary philosophical and empirical conversations about our future with advanced AI. 🤩

A few months ago, @nhaghtal, @niloofar_mire , and I sat down and talked about AI and its socio-economic impacts in Persian/Farsi 💚 Mahoor, a gen-AI persona is present with us in this movie. Enjoy watching it here:

Almost one week since I joined GDM’s AGI & Society teamin London. Special thanks to many but most profoundly the GDM co-founder @ShaneLegg and the unbeatable AGI & Society research lead @IasonGabriel for building an incredible interdisciplinary research team. I’m very priviledged to be a part of this effort.