Further human + AI + proof assistant work on Knuth's "Claude Cycles" problem

Knuth Claude's Cycles note update: problem now fully solved, by LLMs - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47306926 - March 2026 (2 comments)

https://chatgpt.com/share/69aaab4b-888c-8003-9a02-d1df80f9c7...

Claude's Cycles [pdf] - https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47230710 - March 2026 (362 comments)

https://twitter.com/BoWang87/status/2037648937453232504

Knuth Claude's Cycles note update: problem now fully solved, by LLMs | Hacker News

I've always said this but AI will win a fields medal before being able to manage a McDonald's.

Math seems difficult to us because it's like using a hammer (the brain) to twist in a screw (math).

LLMs are discovering a lot of new math because they are great at low depth high breadth situations.

I predict that in the future people will ditch LLMs in favor of AlphaGo style RL done on Lean syntax trees. These should be able to think on much larger timescales.

Any professional mathematician will tell you that their arsenal is ~ 10 tricks. If we can codify those tricks as latent vectors it's GG

As a professional mathematician, I would say that a good proof requires a very good representation of the problem, and then pulling out the tricks. The latter part is easy to get operating using LLMs, they can do it already. It's the former part that still needs humans, and I'm perfectly fine with that.

But are you ok with the trendline of ai improvement? The speed of improvement indicates humans will only get further and further removed from the loop.

I see posts like your all the time comforting themselves that humans still matter, and every-time people like you are describing a human owning an ever shrinking section of the problem space.

Humans needing to ask new question due to curiosity push the boundaries further, find new directions, ways or motivations to explore, maybe invent new spaces to explore. LLMs are just tools that people use. When people are no longer needed AI serves no purpose at all.