In that case, I'm glad AI could so handily improve collaboration for frontier mathematics. Progress should not be held back by a lack of willingness or ability to cooperate.
Have you every used AI for work on truly cutting edge at least graduate level academic research? It's nothing like writing software, i do both professionally. Every model I've had access to requires a LOT of hand holding to get it to do the right thing. No model is getting set up with a single prompt, told to go, and then solving a millennium problem (unless they've explicitly stated that, which i would still doubt). It takes a lot of guidance to get these AIs to solve any serious problem. It's not outside at least my reach to believe that openAI is taking these nudges from intelligent people and combining those with the internal, non public models to make great press releases as it tumbled towards an infinite debt wall. I don't think there's a thing they wouldn't do to save their company.
Preprint link: https://arxiv.org/pdf/2610.33179
Author's post on LinkedIn with details: https://www.linkedin.com/posts/christopher-herzog-a2985229a_...
Prompt to GPT-5.6 Sol:
"I would like you to write for me a short article that could be published in Physical Review Letters. I would like you to choose the question, do the analysis and write up the results. The constraints I put on the question are 1) that it should be in the hep-th set of topics (so that I have a hope of evaluating the arguments and results); 2) the answer can be written up in a short format of 5 pages or less; 3) the result is of significance enough that it can be published in PRL. I want to break up the task into several steps. The first is to find a good question, so give me three candidates. I’m also going to involve Claude in the process. Claude is going to find three candidates too, and the next step will be to evaluate each others’ candidate questions."
This is not a model one-shotting a published paper! It's not even published! Anyone with a name can get a preprint up. I read this to mean that he gave it a prompt to find problems, then _he evaluated and chose the problem_, undoubtedly to be someone simple and quick which could be presented in less than 5 pages. After that he let the program work on its own for "a couple of hours". After which he spent _2 weeks_ with the model to improve the results. This does not argue against my point, this is exactly what I'm saying. Of course a model can do parts of the process, but it's terrible at writing it up "in a way mere mortals can understand". You have to hand hold and guide and do work yourself. And this is by an established professor in the field with a record of publications.
I ask you again, have _you_ used this technology to perform graduate+ level research?