[habinero]

No, it's the same for math from what I've seen, aka it can do some of the easy things, usually with a lot of help. People usually mean the Erdos problems (aka "a list of things Paul Erdos thought were neat") and, well, here:

> While Erdős generated a huge number of problems, they are not all equally significant and important. I have, unfortunately, seen some mathematicians grow dismissive of Erdős problems recently, perhaps because they have seen reports of AI solving problems on this site that turned out to be quite simple, and wrongly generalised this to assume that all problems posed by Erdős are amusing novelties, of the level of olympiad problems.

From: https://www.erdosproblems.com/forum/thread/blog:5

The rest of the article isn't about AI at all, but I did think it was funny that it describes mathematicians as having more or the same opinion as SWEs.

[helloplanets]

You're right, definitely as a helper, not a one shot thing.

Here's an example unrelated to the Erdos problems: https://arxiv.org/abs/2510.23513

[habinero]

I flat out don't take arxiv papers seriously without a lot of corroboration. Basically ~anyone can post ~anything to it. They do spam moderation but no content review.

Also that paper admits the problem turned out to be pretty trivial and was only unsolved because nobody had bothered to try that hard (page 11)

There's a lot of problems with paid scientific journals being a walled garden and I am by no means defending that system, buuuut it's also true that anything published to an open repository is almost certainly there because it wasn't good enough for anything else.