Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2511.10543

From Euler to Today: Universal Mathematical Fallibility A Large-Scale Computational Analysis of Errors in ArXiv Papers

Igor Rivin
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

We present the results of a large-scale computational analysis of mathematical papers from the ArXiv repository, demonstrating a comprehensive system that not only detects mathematical errors but provides complete referee reports with journal tier recommendations. Our automated analysis system processed over 37,000 papers across multiple mathematical categories, revealing significant error rates and quality distributions. Remarkably, the system identified errors in papers spanning three centuries of mathematics, including works by Leonhard Euler (1707-1783) and Peter Gustav Lejeune Dirichlet (1805-1859), as well as contemporary Fields medalists. In Numerical Analysis (math.NA), we observed an error rate of 9.6\% (2,271 errors in 23,761 papers), while Geometric Topology (math.GT) showed 6.5\% (862 errors in 13,209 papers). Strikingly, Category Theory (math.CT) showed 0\% errors in 93 papers analyzed, with evidence suggesting these results are ``easier'' for automated analysis. Beyond error detection, the system evaluated papers for journal suitability, recommending 0.4\% for top generalist journals, 15.5\% for top field-specific journals, and categorizing the remainder across specialist venues. These findings demonstrate both the universality of mathematical error across all eras and the feasibility of automated comprehensive mathematical peer review at scale. This work demonstrates that the methodology, while applied here to mathematics, is discipline-agnostic and could be readily extended to physics, computer science, and other fields represented in the ArXiv repository.

Explore related subjects

math.HOcs.AIcs.DL

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Igor Rivin. 2025-11-04. From Euler to Today: Universal Mathematical Fallibility A Large-Scale Computational Analysis of Errors in ArXiv Papers. https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.10543

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↗