[ezrast]

Think of all the algebra problems you got in school where the solution started with "get all the x's on the same side of the equation." You then applied a bunch of rules like "you can do anything to one side of the equals sign if you also do it to the other side" to reiterate the same abstract concept over and over, gradually altering the symbology until you wound up at something that looked like the quadratic formula or whatever. Then you were done, because you had transformed the representation (not the value) of x into something you knew how to work with.

[monadINtop]

People don't uncover new mathematics with formal rules and symbols pushing, at least not for the most part. They do so first with intuition and vague belief. Formalisation and rigour is the final stage of constructing a proof or argument.

[glial]

Perhaps, but then what's the point of symbolic systems at all?

[vatsadev]

Yeah, the AI in question can turn intuition into statements, then turn that to symbolic intuition, then work with that until something breaks it, then revise the system, etc, quite like a human?