Search arXiv⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2610.31804

Research profiles and the mathematical landscape: A grassroots proposal for mathematics with AI

Helmut H. W. Hofer
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Repeated mathematical work with AI leaves behind corrections, failed arguments, and sometimes useful ways of asking questions. I propose keeping these in a research profile that the mathematician develops and controls. The profile marks parts of the mathematical landscape according to the researcher's understanding and makes those markings available to later work with AI. This suggests experiments with individual profiles, shared readings of papers, and graduate education. It also raises mathematical questions about the landscape itself: its connections, distances, and changes under discovery. I describe two examples, searching for branches of mathematics with a common base and recovering useful questions from the history of Floer theory. The aim is to give mathematicians something to try and a part in deciding how mathematical AI develops.

Explore related subjects

math.HO

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

Helmut H. W. Hofer. 2026-10-22. Research profiles and the mathematical landscape: A grassroots proposal for mathematics with AI. https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.31804

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

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Robert J. Daverman (1941-2026)

This is an expanded version of a memorial article that is to appear in the Notices of the American Mathematical Society.

math.HO↗
arXiv2026

An event is a set, not a number: building the algebra of events before the probability measure in a school progression

Asked what an event is, pupils often answer with a fraction. This paper argues that school probability should separate two learnings and order them: the algebra of events (random experiment, outcomes, sample space, events as sets of outcomes, the operations not, or, and) and the probability measure, which attaches a number to each event. Before learning to compute the probability of an event, pupils should learn to build, identify and handle the event. The thesis rests on the structure of finite probability, in which the rules are facts about events carried over by an additive function, and on the history of the subject, in which errors such as d'Alembert's two tosses concerned the weighting of outcomes and were resolved by refining events into equally likely outcomes. Five design principles are stated: two objects with two names; the event before its probability; modal judgements (certain, possible, impossible) on sets before numbers; the algebra of events taught as such, with the rules derived from it; the sample space as a modelling choice, with frequencies last, as statistical estimates, and the separation repeated for conditional probability and random variables. They are confronted with the probability chapters, from age 9 to 18, of the French-curriculum courses published at https://commeunjeu.org, with research and other curricula. In primary school events precede probabilities without set notation, which comes at age 12; the lessons apply the principles and prove the rules from events in lower secondary school. But, in the version analysed, events account for 18 to 44 percent of the exercises, proofs are hidden in upper secondary school, and automatically corrected calculations record only the number. It proposes number-free tasks on events for ages 6 to 8 and changes to the International Baccalaureate curriculum. No empirical evaluation is reported; hypotheses are stated.

math.HO↗
arXiv2026

On AI and Progress in Mathematics: Dreaming a Mathematical Universal Machine

In the autumn of 2026, mathematics is facing what may be the deepest crisis in its history. The entire ecosystem through which mathematical knowledge is produced, validated, communicated, and assessed is beginning to break down. Mathematics departments, those usually quiet and civilized places, are suddenly in turmoil -- the unlikely theaters of a new Battle of the Ancients and the Moderns. The source of the crisis is clear: AI systems have become better than even the best human mathematicians at proving and validating mathematical results. This document proposes a metaphor for mathematical activity: we once thought of ourselves as mountain climbers; soon, we may become miners digging in the mathematical mine, either collaborating or competing with mathematical AI machines. Publications would then be seen primarily as a means of helping humans understand mathematics, while the measurement of mathematical progress would be entrusted to a Mathematical Universal Machine. In nontechnical terms, we explore what this brave new world of mathematics might look like and how we might collectively shape its future.

math.HO↗