I was able to use an extended conversation with an AI https://chatgpt.com/share/68ded9b1-37dc-800e-b04c-97095c70eb29 to help answer a MathOverflow question https://mathoverflow.net/questions/501066/is-the-least-common-multiple-sequence-textlcm1-2-dots-n-a-subset-of-t/501125#501125 . I had already conducted a theoretical analysis suggesting that the answer to this question was negative, but needed some numerical parameters verifying certain inequalities in order to conclusively build a counterexample. Initially I sought to ask AI to supply Python code to search for a counterexample that I could run and adjust myself, but found that the run time was infeasible and the initial choice of parameters would have made the search doomed to failure anyway. I then switched strategies and instead engaged in a step by step conversation with the AI where it would perform heuristic calculations to locate feasible choices of parameters. Eventually, the AI was able to produce parameters which I could then verify separately (admittedly using Python code supplied by the same AI, but this was a simple 29-line program that I could visually inspect to do what was asked, and also provided numerical values in line with previous heuristic predictions).

Here, the AI tool use was a significant time saver - doing the same task unassisted would likely have required multiple hours of manual code and debugging (the AI was able to use the provided context to spot several mathematical mistakes in my requests, and fix them before generating code). Indeed I would have been very unlikely to even attempt this numerical search without AI assistance (and would have sought a theoretical asymptotic analysis instead).

ChatGPT - Conjecture disproving strategy

A conversational AI system that listens, learns, and challenges

ChatGPT
@tao ChatGPT is a great way to unlearn any subject & unteach yourself to think about problems!

@tao @jackemled Okay, I don’t know how to put this, but the person you’re replying to literally has a Fields Medal. I’m sure that your concern is an issue with some folks (e.g. grade school students), but I wouldn’t worry about Terrence Tao unlearning and unteaching himself to think about problems.

He’s a pure mathematician, the problems themselves are his interest.

@kaleidosium I know that. Relying on chatgpt for everything is unhealthy for yourself* & for the world**, it doesn't matter if you have a formal education in the subject you're asking it about or not. "Use it or lose it" applies to everyone regardless of experience, & your level of education does not somehow make it less harmful to yourself or others.

I don't care if he unteaches himself anything, that's his choice, but I think we should not be glorifying a technology that is fundamentally abusive towards people. I left this comment to call out use of LLMs for what they are, a device marketed for offloading thought onto even though they do not think, nothing else. My intent isn't to debate this, just to explain my reasoning, & I will not continue.

*"Use it or lose it", false information, & it's basically gambling.
**They waste insanely large amounts of energy & create massive amounts of pollution, & they do it without even giving a single cent to the people whose work was stolen to train them.

@jackemled I’m not sure how he’s“relying everything on ChatGPT”, I understand your environmental and data concerns, and I do agree with your assessment that yes, LLMs are notoriously limited in what they can do (every AI researcher worth their salt agrees with this).

But this is just him mentioning that he used it to help solve one problem, he isn’t blindly glorifying the technology and think it’s a god or whatever. I find his tone to be more skeptical of the technology in general, actually.

Your reasoning isn’t sound, and I’ll leave it at that.

@kaleidosium I said I'm not continuing. Go debate someone else.
@jackemled @tao And, if you are an expert in the topic of discussion, a potential way to save a few hours of your time to use for other things! (For this example, teaching people how to better use ChatGPT.)
@drScott @tao No, just teach them to use a search engine & fact check. It takes less time & is more reliable for them & for you. Better for the environment & cheaper for them as well. Boolean searches & fuzzy searches have existed for decades. Google has both available for free.

@jackemled We all get to choose how to spend those saved few hours =)

(I don't understand what your 'no' is refuting, my best guess is that it refers to my description of what Tao did with his few hours saved.)

@drScott The "no" was to "teach them to use a LLM". It takes much longer to learn how to use one of those & they never give reliable results no matter how "good" you are at it. It's like gambling; you feel like you're getting better at it, but the chances of a good outcome never actually change.

For boolean searches, you do get better at it; you learn how to filter out unwanted search results. For example, you might search how to program a videogame AI -"chatgpt" -"llm" ~"java" ~"python" to find a guide on making a decision tree or something for a videogame character, in Java or Python, without results being polluted by SEO LLM slop. Google even has a search builder tool so you don't need to learn this in order to make good use of it too.

@drScott We do all get to choose how we spend the time we save with our tools, but in my experience (and literally everyone else's, even people that thought it helped at first), LLMs waste more time than they save. Sure, there's a 1% chance it gives you exactly what you need immediately, but the 99% of the time it makes you pull the slot machine lever again vastly outweighs that.