Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1709.05662

Geometry in the Courtroom

Noah Giansiracusa·Cameron Ricciardi
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

There has been a recent media blitz on a cohort of mathematicians valiantly working to fix America's democratic system by combatting gerrymandering with geometry. While statistics commonly features in the courtroom (forensics, DNA analysis, etc.), the gerrymandering news raises a natural question: in what other ways has pure math, specifically geometry and topology, been involved in court cases and legal scholarship? In this survey article, we collect a few examples with topics ranging from the Pythagorean formula to the Ham Sandwich Theorem, and we discuss some jurists' perspectives on geometric reasoning in the legal realm. One of our goals is to provide math educators with engaging real-world instances of some abstract geometric concepts.

Explore related subjects

math.HO

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Noah Giansiracusa, Cameron Ricciardi. 2017-09-17. Geometry in the Courtroom. https://arxiv.org/abs/1709.05662

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Come for the vibe, stay for the math

This article describes our experiences in mathematical outreach over the past decade. We talk about specific activities, but also general principles that we've learned along the way.

math.HO↗
arXiv2026

Graduate Mathematics in the Age of AI: Forming Mathematicians for Original, Independent, and Responsible Inquiry

Artificial intelligence can increasingly produce plausible, sophisticated mathematical material faster than a developing graduate student can understand or verify it. A sophisticated result or paper draft therefore becomes weaker evidence of the student's own mathematical development. This creates a formation gap between output and personal capacity, and a trust gap between a convincing argument and warranted acceptance. The formation gap can persist even when the student understands the output: understanding a supplied argument does not by itself establish the capacity to initiate and direct inquiry. These gaps are not the whole story. AI can also help students explore examples, compare approaches, enter unfamiliar areas, and undertake ambitious research. The task is to design an apprenticeship that realizes these possibilities while developing substantive mathematical command. The central purpose of a mathematics PhD is to form mathematicians capable of original, independent, and responsible inquiry, including inquiry conducted with AI. This document develops that objective through four connected capacities: competence, judgment, independence, and responsibility. It distinguishes a work's contribution to mathematics from the evidence it provides of a student's formation; explains how a known answer can initiate rather than end creative inquiry; and proposes changes in learning activities, assessment, doctoral originality, advising, and institutional support. Purposeful independent work and ambitious AI-assisted research are complementary parts of the model. Its recommendations include proportionate contribution statements, recognition of advising costs, and staged pilots evaluating both mathematical ability and effective human--AI collaboration. The aim is not to preserve an inherited sequence of training, but to improve mathematical formation as mathematical practice changes.

math.HO↗