⚡ Why this matters

• This is the first organized pushback from the field AI labs use as their favorite proof of intelligence.
• The argument is about metrics, not capability. Solve rate went up, understanding did not. That pattern applies to any team optimizing a proxy.
• Tao endorsed AI in math for two years. When your best advocate signs the complaint, the complaint is not Luddism.

🔍 What happened

• On September 11, 25 Fields Medalists published 'A Severe Misalignment of AI in Mathematics' on Terence Tao's blog and at mathandai.org. Signatures are open.
• Signatories include Tao, Peter Scholze, Maryna Viazovska, June Huh, James Maynard, Martin Hairer, Pierre Deligne and 2026 medalist Yu Deng.
• Core claim: LLMs can now solve major open problems, but labs using those problems as benchmarks is detrimental to the science and the community.
• Their concern: results announced in a rush, no proper writeup, no isolation of new methods, no citation of prior work. They call this a severe attribution and plagiarism problem.
• Deeper concern: training exists to develop understanding and the ability to formulate new questions. AI producing the results directly breaks that chain for students.
• They name it a general threat to intellectual work and say the same misalignment is coming for other scientific and creative professions. The Economist reported the declaration the same day.

💬 Smart takes

• The declaration: 'the mass production at faster and faster pace of true/false statements could destroy fertile ground instead of breathing life into new ideas.'
• theahura, engineer and 12 Grams of Carbon author: it is a classic case of overfitting, mistaking the measure, solving hard problems, with the goal, making math accessible. Destruction parading as democratization.
• Skeptic, from Tao's own comments: none of you objected when other professions were at risk. Several signatories helped build today's benchmark culture.

🧭 Where this goes

1. Likelyat least one lab announces a math results policy with writeups, attribution and a review period before claiming a solved problem.
2. Likelythe signature list passes a few hundred working mathematicians within a month.
3. Possiblea major math journal refuses submissions that do not disclose AI-generated proof steps and their provenance.
4. Possiblethe same letter format shows up from chemists or software researchers.
5. Wild Carda lab funds a mathematician-led institute to write up its AI results and the field takes the money.