An AI-Generated Proof for Erdős Problem 397

Matthew Berman discusses Neel Somani's GPT-5.2 Pro-assisted proof and speculates about self-improving AI. Later research found that the problem already had a published human solution.

MBMatthew Berman登壇者 · Forward Future
チャンネル
Matthew Berman
公開日
2026年1月12日
動画
1:30
読了時間
2 分
スライド
1
原文
英語
YouTube で開く
スクロールすると動画は右下に小さくなって再生を続けます。字幕は閲覧言語に合わせて切り替わります。
閲覧言語2 言語で読めます
この記事はまだ日本語に翻訳されていないため、英語の原文を表示しています。
要約

30 秒でわかる

Matthew Berman highlights Neel Somani's report that GPT-5.2 Pro generated a proof for Erdős problem 397, which was submitted and accepted by Terence Tao. He extrapolates from this result to a possible intelligence explosion and scientific advances. A full human solution from 2012 was subsequently identified, so the AI proof was not the first solution to the problem; neither the result nor its acceptance establishes that an intelligence explosion is underway.

  1. 1An AI-assisted proofBerman recounts Somani's submitted proof and Tao's acceptance. The later discovery of a 2012 human solution changes the interpretation of the result.
  2. 2A wave of math resultsBerman describes several recent AI-assisted results, but their difficulty and novelty vary and require individual review.
  3. 3A speculative feedback loopHe imagines AI improving its own algorithms and contributing to medicine and materials. This proof does not demonstrate that such a loop has occurred.

ポイント

  1. Somani reported generating a proof for Erdős problem 397 with GPT-5.2 Pro and formalizing it with Harmonic's tools.
  2. A complete human solution from 2012 was later found, so the AI-generated proof was not the first solution.
  3. The video does not establish that this was among the hardest mathematical problems or that only a few hundred people could solve it.
  4. Recursive AI improvement and applications to disease and materials remain speculative conclusions rather than demonstrated results.
全文

チャプターごとに整えた全文を読む

文字起こしのみ
01

The Erdős proof

Berman describes Somani's GPT-5.2 Pro proof for problem 397 and its acceptance. A previous complete human solution was later identified.

Neel Somani reported using ChatGPT to produce a proof for an Erdős problem. The post shown in the video identifies it as problem 397 and says GPT-5.2 Pro generated the proof, which was formalized with Harmonic and accepted by Terence Tao. I describe it as one of the hardest problems on Earth, but that ranking and my estimate of how many people could solve it are not established.

Somani's report on the proof
スライド 1 / 1Somani's report on the proofThe displayed post identifies problem 397, GPT-5.2 Pro and the formalization step; an earlier human solution was later found.

I say this was the sixth such result in two weeks and see it as evidence that AI is advancing quickly in mathematics. Individual problems and contributions differ, however, and a human solution to problem 397 had already appeared in 2012; it was identified later. The generated proof was therefore not the first solution, even though it was a distinct AI-assisted proof.

02

Possible implications

Berman speculates about recursively improving AI and scientific applications. The mathematical result alone does not establish those outcomes.

I wonder whether AI that can solve difficult mathematics might design better algorithms for itself, apply those improvements and set off an intelligence explosion. In that imagined future, more powerful AI might help tackle diseases or develop new materials. These are possibilities, not outcomes established by this mathematical result.

Somani, a quantitative researcher, says the model produced the proof in about 15 minutes after prompting. I think this could be the beginning of an intelligence explosion. That remains speculation: a proof, even one accepted after review, does not demonstrate recursive self-improvement or a medical breakthrough.

同じチャンネルの記事

スライド 12 枚34:21EN
Matthew Berman· 2026年10月27日Matthew Berman Examines Anthropic’s IPO Filing, AI Growth and GovernanceMatthew Berman, Sam Altman · Forward FutureThe presenter reviews the S-1’s financial metrics, compute strategy and voting structure while questioning the tension between rapid AI development and safety.AnthropicAI Safetyエンタープライズ AI+2
スライド 2 枚0:36EN
Matthew Berman· 2026年10月25日Kimi K3.1 and a Rubik’s Cube Solver DemonstrationMatthew Berman · Forward FutureMatthew Berman shows a scrambled virtual cube being solved and gives the Kimi K3.1 test a favorable assessment.評価(Evals)コーディングエージェントOpen-weight models
スライド 2 枚0:21EN
Matthew Berman· 2026年10月24日An AI-Generated Kimi Benchmark Chart Used Invented ScoresMatthew Berman · Forward FutureMatthew Berman asks for a graph of Kimi K3.1 Pro benchmarks, then discovers that the displayed figures are illustrative placeholders.Benchmarks評価(Evals)Generative media
スライド 6 枚25:50EN
Matthew Berman· 2026年10月24日Kimi K3.1 Pro Tested: Strong 3D Demos, Uneven Results and Competitive PricingMatthew Berman · Forward FutureMatthew Berman tests the open-weight model on coding, 3D rendering and visual explanations, then compares benchmark results and prices.Open-weight modelsBenchmarksAI cost & performance+1
スライド 2 枚32:20EN
Matthew Berman· 2026年10月23日Who Is Local AI For? The Costs, Trade-offs and a Hybrid FutureMatthew Berman · Forward FutureMatthew Berman weighs data control and independence against hardware cost, setup complexity and inference speed.Local inferenceOpen-weight modelsAI cost & performance+1
スライド 6 枚1:03:37EN
Matthew Berman· 2026年10月23日Matthew Berman’s Team Tests Kimi K3.1 on Animation, Games, and ChartsMatthew Berman, Alex, Brian · Forward FutureA live team AMA turns into an informal test of Kimi K3.1, from personal-agent workflows to motion graphics, a browser game, and a benchmark chart.コーディングエージェントGenerative media評価(Evals)+2