Right, it also has to model a substantial fraction of reality (or at least a true simulation of it) to accomplish these things.
The story about OpenAI's Navier-Stokes solution is a good example of what I mean. I don't think it would have been possible without computer assistance because that proof is long and complicated. I'm also not sure that it would have been possible without a human proposing a new approach to the problem, because by all accounts that's exactly what led to the absurd amount of spending that OpenAI did to solve the issue.
I feel like that at least implies that there's some room left for humans in the new world.
But stop thinking that just because they were initially simpler solutions that it stayed that way. We are in the singularity now!
It took a human being to see the beauty of an alternate approach and purpose it, and only then could OpenAI spend millions of dollars to squeeze out a result.
I am very doubtful that we will see models capable of making intuitive leaps anytime soon, or being "creative." Neither of those are straightforward objectives to train against.