LLMs are increasingly capable of autonomously proving important mathematical theorems. Mathematicians need to maintain our status as an independent scientific community and realign the incentives to encourage human mathematical understanding. If you are a mathematician who shares these values, I encourage you to join the [Association for Human Mathematics](https://www.ahmath.org/). **Statement on AI use:** I believe AI companies have a predatory relationship to the field of mathematics. As a result, I will not use LLMs for the indefinite future. Moreover, I will not collaborate on any project which uses LLMs. I support the [Leiden declaration](https://leidendeclaration.ai/). Below are essays I have written about AI and mathematics, listed in chronological order. I encourage you to start with [the AI dissenter viewpoint](https://proofsandprompts.com/2026/08/09/the-ai-dissenter-viewpoint/) and then read [how we can win](https://tasmin.substack.com/p/how-we-can-win). All views expressed below are my own, and not those of any professional organizations or universities to which I belong. - [Mathematicians need to act.](https://tasmin.substack.com/p/mathematicians-need-to-act) - [More calls to action for the mathematical community](https://tasmin.substack.com/p/more-calls-to-action-for-the-mathematical). - [The AI dissenter viewpoint](https://proofsandprompts.com/2026/08/09/the-ai-dissenter-viewpoint/), hosted on *Proofs and Prompts*. - [Eroding our independence](https://tasmin.substack.com/p/eroding-our-independence). - [How we can win](https://tasmin.substack.com/p/how-we-can-win). - [Social trust and epistemology in the AI era](https://tasmin.substack.com/p/social-trust-and-epistemology-in). A recent effort by four mathematicians (Raphael Appenzeller, Francesco Fournier-Facio, Simon Machado, and Anand Rao Tadipatri) led to the creation of [Proofs and Prompts](https://proofsandprompts.com/), a new public forum for mathematicians to have good-faith public discourse about the role of AI in mathematics. I support this effort and have contributed an essay to this venue. If you are a mathematician, I encourage you to join the discourse if you feel compelled to do so, and to subscribe to Proofs and Prompts. I link below to some essays I found to be insightful, and which have informed my perspectives on AI and mathematics, as well as possible paths forward for addressing the negative impacts of LLMs on mathematics. - [The crisis of AI-generated mathematics](https://arxiv.org/abs/2608.02859), by Max Weinreich. - [All the math we will not see](https://proofsandprompts.com/2026/09/24/all-the-math-we-will-not-see/), by Alessandro Della Corte. - [Mathematicians, machines, and the Earth](https://alexis-marchand.github.io/docs/mathematicians-machines-earth/mathematicians-machines-earth.pdf), by Alexis Marchand. - [Why AI is dangerous for science](https://archive.ph/QBL44) by Zeynep Tufekci. - [Can a junior mathematician remain an AI vegetarian?](https://marcelgoh.ca/2026/07/05/ai-vegetarian.html) by Marcel Goh. - [What will become of us?](https://mariopasquato.substack.com/p/what-will-become-of-us) by Mario Pasquato. - [Some thoughts on AI (and math)](https://bcalim.org/ai) by Bora Çalım. - [Mathematics without mathematicians](https://borretti.me/article/mathematics-without-mathematicians) by Fernando Borretti. - [Could AI slow science?](https://www.normaltech.ai/p/could-ai-slow-science) by Sayash Kapoor and Arvind Narayanan. - On a light note: I enjoyed reading this [short story](https://www.math.brown.edu/reschwar/Stories/AI.pdf) entitled "The Fate of the Riemann Hypothesis" by Rich Schwartz. Initiatives I find interesting: - [\begin{proof}](https://www.begin-proof.com/), a collective which is practicing AI-free mathematics - [Proofs and prompts](https://proofsandprompts.com), a new public forum for mathematicians to discuss AI My views on mathematical understanding and LLMs could be concisely summarized by the following quote by László Krasznahorkai. [Source](https://www.theparisreview.org/interviews/7177/the-art-of-fiction-no-240-laszlo-krasznahorkai). > For me, details are the most important, yes. The smallest details are a question of life and death. A mistake in a sentence kills me. That’s why I can’t bear to read my books, because it’s almost impossible to write a book, in three hundred ­pages, without one rhythmic mistake. And maybe this isn’t a question of perfection but a desire to care about the smallest details, because there’s no difference in importance between the smallest details and the whole. What’s the difference between one drop of the ocean, and the ocean as a whole? Nothing. Nothing. I end by sharing some words of Grothendieck from *Récoltes et Semailles*. > In our acquisition of knowledge of the Universe (whether mathematical or otherwise) that which renovates the quest is nothing more nor less than complete innocence. It is in this state of complete innocence that we receive everything from the moment of our birth. Although so often the object of our contempt and of our private fears, it is always in us. It alone can unite humility with boldness so as to allow us to penetrate to the heart of things, or allow things to enter us and taken possession of us. > > This unique power is in no way a privilege given to “exceptional talents” – persons of incredible brain power (for example), who are better able to manipulate, with dexterity and ease, an enormous mass of data, ideas and specialized skills. Such gifts are undeniably valuable, and certainly worthy of envy from those who (like myself) were not so “endowed at birth, far beyond the ordinary”. > > Yet it is not these gifts, nor the most determined ambition combined with irresistible will-power, that enables one to surmount the “invisible yet formidable boundaries” that encircle our universe. Only innocence can surmount them, which mere knowledge doesn’t even take into account, in those moments when we find ourselves able to listen to things, totally and intensely absorbed in child’s play.