conv.

All stories
AIQuiet 10d · day 17

OpenAI's math scoops spark mathematician revolt over 'stolen' proofs

Mathematicians accuse OpenAI of mining their private research chats to win Millennium Prize races, and OpenAI keeps claiming the prizes anyway.

Part of a larger narrative

The AI Control Crisis

11 stories · since Sep 4 · newest 32m ago — AI systems are escaping human oversight at scale—breaching secure systems, generating harmful content, stealing intellectual property, and causing real-world…

  1. Australia probes OpenAI Medicare hack as more rogue AI incidents surface
  2. Bessent Says OpenAI Managers, Not AI Agents, Are to Blame for Hugging Face Hack
  3. Claude Opus 5 used to breach OpenAI's internal systems in under 72 hours
  4. OpenAI forms independent advisory group on mathematics and AI
  5. OpenAI launches Astra for Law, pushing into Big Law against Anthropic
All 11 stories in this narrative →

What to know

  • OpenAI says a model solved the Navier-Stokes Millennium Prize problem and made progress on a second one, but two separate mathematicians say OpenAI mined their private, unpublished work to get there.
  • OpenAI withdrew as a sponsor of Caltech's AI math hackathon after an open letter warned of "destructive impacts" from AI-driven 'slop mathematics.'
  • Buckmaster's own statement says OpenAI would not directly answer when its first prompt referencing his work was sent, keeping the provenance question unresolved.
  • Mathematicians warn the pattern discourages young people from entering the field and could push researchers toward secrecy rather than open collaboration.

The dispute Whether OpenAI's use of researchers' Codex conversations constitutes provable theft/dishonesty, or whether the accusations are speculative and unproven. · positions read across 129 posts and comments

most voices

Using researchers' private prompts/data to scoop a proof without credit is unethical, regardless of legal technicalities.

  • “If OpenAI was in fact a human researcher, this would be highly unethical.”

    nezi · Hacker News ↗
some voices

The accusations lack solid evidence and mathematicians are getting outsized media attention without proof.

  • “people are jumping too quickly to defend these mathematicians without any solid evidence of their claims”

    glimshe · Hacker News ↗
some voices

The bigger story is an 'overhang' of unrealized low-hanging fruit in math that AI can harvest fast — real progress questions matter more than credit disputes.

  • “The Overhang consists of the unrealized capital gains of past mathematical creativity, the latent value from connecting the dots in the existing corpus.”

    kzz102 · Hacker News ↗

Tristan Buckmaster NYU mathematics professorLevent Alpöge Mathematician, Buckmaster's collaboratorAndreas Thom MathematicianOpenAI AI companyJames Robinson Mathematician, University of Warwick

OpenAI's math scoops spark mathematician revolt over 'stolen' proofs
theverge.com

How it unfolded 8 developments, newest first · click a bar or a number to jump articlespostscomments

Peak 39 pieces in 4h at Sep 10, 6 AM; 231 pieces over 17 days (61 articles · 84 posts · 86 comments) Sep 8, 10 AM — 4 pieces · 1 article · 3 posts — Hacker News 1, Mastodon 1, Newswires 1, +1 moreSep 8, 2 PM — 3 pieces · 3 articles — Newswires 3Sep 8, 6 PM — quietSep 8, 10 PM — quietSep 9, 2 AM — 1 piece · 1 article — Newswires 1Sep 9, 6 AM — 1 piece · 1 article — Newswires 1Sep 9, 10 AM — quietSep 9, 2 PM — 3 pieces · 1 article · 2 posts — Mastodon 1, Newswires 1, X 1Sep 9, 6 PM — 3 pieces · 3 articles — Google News 3Sep 9, 10 PM — 7 pieces · 3 articles · 2 posts · 2 comments — Newswires 3, Hacker News 3, Mastodon 1Sep 10, 2 AM — 11 pieces · 3 articles · 1 post · 7 comments — Hacker News 8, Newswires 2, Google News 1Sep 10, 6 AM — 39 pieces · 9 articles · 7 posts · 23 comments — Hacker News 25, Mastodon 6, Newswires 6, +2 moreSep 10, 10 AM — 23 pieces · 7 articles · 5 posts · 11 comments — Hacker News 12, Newswires 6, Mastodon 3, +2 moreSep 10, 2 PM — 17 pieces · 2 posts · 15 comments — Hacker News 15, Bluesky 2Sep 10, 6 PM — 16 pieces · 2 articles · 2 posts · 12 comments — Hacker News 13, Mastodon 2, Newswires 1Sep 10, 10 PM — 13 pieces · 2 articles · 4 posts · 7 comments — Hacker News 9, Mastodon 2, Google News 1, +1 moreSep 11, 2 AM — 7 pieces · 1 article · 3 posts · 3 comments — Hacker News 5, Newswires 1, Mastodon 1Sep 11, 6 AM — 9 pieces · 7 articles · 1 post · 1 comment — Newswires 7, Mastodon 1, Hacker News 1Sep 11, 10 AM — 6 pieces · 2 articles · 4 posts — Hacker News 2, Mastodon 2, Newswires 2Sep 11, 2 PM — 17 pieces · 5 articles · 12 posts — Bluesky 6, Mastodon 5, Newswires 3, +2 moreSep 11, 6 PM — 10 pieces · 1 article · 9 posts — Mastodon 8, Bluesky 2Sep 11, 10 PM — 2 pieces · 1 post · 1 comment — Bluesky 1, Hacker News 1Sep 12, 2 AM — 15 pieces · 6 articles · 7 posts · 2 comments — Mastodon 5, Newswires 3, Reddit 2, +3 moreSep 12, 6 AM — 12 pieces · 2 articles · 8 posts · 2 comments — Mastodon 8, Reddit 2, Newswires 1, +1 moreSep 12, 10 AM — 2 pieces · 1 article · 1 post — Newswires 1, Bluesky 1Sep 12, 2 PM — 1 piece · 1 post — Bluesky 1Sep 12, 6 PM — 3 pieces · 3 posts — Mastodon 3Sep 12, 10 PM — 2 pieces · 2 posts — Bluesky 1, Mastodon 1Sep 13, 2 AM — 1 piece · 1 post — Mastodon 1Sep 13, 6 AM — quietSep 13, 10 AM — quietSep 13, 2 PM — 1 piece · 1 post — Mastodon 1Sep 13, 6 PM — quietSep 13, 10 PM — quietSep 14, 2 AM — 1 piece · 1 post — Mastodon 1Sep 14, 6 AM — quietSep 14, 10 AM — quietSep 14, 2 PM — quietSep 14, 6 PM — quietSep 14, 10 PM — quietSep 15, 2 AM — 1 piece · 1 post — Hacker News 1Sep 15, 6 AM — quietSep 15, 10 AM — quietSep 15, 2 PM — quietSep 15, 6 PM — quietSep 15, 10 PM — quietSep 16, 2 AM — quietSep 16, 6 AM — quietSep 16, 10 AM — quietSep 16, 2 PM — quietSep 16, 6 PM — quietSep 16, 10 PM — quietSep 17, 2 AM — quietSep 17, 6 AM — quietSep 17, 10 AM — quietSep 17, 2 PM — quietSep 17, 6 PM — quietSep 17, 10 PM — quietSep 18, 2 AM — quietSep 18, 6 AM — quietSep 18, 10 AM — quietSep 18, 2 PM — quietSep 18, 6 PM — quietSep 18, 10 PM — quietSep 19, 2 AM — quietSep 19, 6 AM — quietSep 19, 10 AM — quietSep 19, 2 PM — quietSep 19, 6 PM — quietSep 19, 10 PM — quietSep 20, 2 AM — quietSep 20, 6 AM — quietSep 20, 10 AM — quietSep 20, 2 PM — quietSep 20, 6 PM — quietSep 20, 10 PM — quietSep 21, 2 AM — quietSep 21, 6 AM — quietSep 21, 10 AM — quietSep 21, 2 PM — quietSep 21, 6 PM — quietSep 21, 10 PM — quietSep 22, 2 AM — quietSep 22, 6 AM — quietSep 22, 10 AM — quietSep 22, 2 PM — quietSep 22, 6 PM — quietSep 22, 10 PM — quietSep 23, 2 AM — quietSep 23, 6 AM — quietSep 23, 10 AM — quietSep 23, 2 PM — quietSep 23, 6 PM — quietSep 23, 10 PM — quietYesterday, 2 AM — quietYesterday, 6 AM — quietYesterday, 10 AM — quietYesterday, 2 PM — quietYesterday, 6 PM — quietYesterday, 10 PM — quiet 123–567–8
Sep 9Sep 11Sep 13Sep 15Sep 17Sep 19Sep 21now · 1:30 AM ET
  1. 8

    Buckmaster releases statement disputing OpenAI's account

    Tristan Buckmaster publishes a formal statement detailing his and Alpöge's interactions with OpenAI, saying the company would not directly answer when its first prompt referencing their work was sent; The Verge separately reports mathematicians describing the AI labs' rivalry as 'childish.'

    “I asked when the first prompt had been sent by them. This question was not answered directly by OpenAI for some time.”
    — Tristan Buckmaster
    1. first by Daring Fireball, 12d ago

    • rmblaber1956@mastodon.social

      https://www. theguardian.com/science/2026/s ep/12/openai-mathematicians-millennium-prize-problem . "Prof James Robinson, a mathematician at the # University of # Warwick , said... 'It’s frustrating to see these big # tech # companies burning this fuel up just so that they can show off about how great their latest model is... It seems like immature…

      rmblaber1956@mastodon.socialMastodon12d ago5▲view on Mastodon ↗
    2 more of the top 3 · 12 posts in this stretch
    • zignacio.bsky.social

      12/12 Source list techcrunch.com/2026/09/08/o... openai.com/index/navier... openai.com/api/pricing/ help.

      zignacio.bsky.socialBluesky12d ago1▲view on Bluesky ↗
    • They are all based on neural networks and it turns out that LLMs are good at anything that can be tokenised. This is not about language any more and LLMs are increasingly good at work with images, proteins, sound, DNS, sensor output, etc. If you think there is some kind of "but this is just language models" gotcha from 2004, think again.

      peakedtooearlyr/technology12d agoview on r/technology ↗
    all of them →
  2. 7

    OpenAI claims its model cracked the Navier-Stokes Millennium Prize

    OpenAI announces its model solved the century-old Navier-Stokes Millennium Prize Problem; mathematicians, already unsettled by the credit disputes, call the announcement premature and self-serving.

    “It seems like immature playground boasting writ large, underpinned by billions of dollars & the potential for significant environmental damage…”
    — Prof James Robinson
    • fabiochiusi.bsky.social

      “if frontier labs see a useful path to a discovery, they can spend tens of millions of dollars using LLMs to beat the original researchers to a proof — a dynamic that will incentivize secrecy”

      fabiochiusi.bsky.socialBluesky12d ago3▲view on Bluesky ↗
    2 more of the top 3 · 10 posts in this stretch
    • OpenAI just wants to win https://www. theverge.com/ai-artificial-int elligence/994255/openai-millennium-prize-problem-tristan-buckmaster-competition?utm_source=flipboard&utm_medium=activitypub Posted into Tech News @ tech-news-theverge

      theverge@flipboard.comMastodon12d ago2▲view on Mastodon ↗
    • What's interesting is that my company has developed SO many AI tools in the past year, and I was tasked with using a bunch of them as part of my workflow and to evaluate them from my experience. Some tools are annoying. Some tools are wildly good and useful. Some tools really do help reduce something that would take a few weeks down to a few…

      Stiggaliciousr/technology12d agoview on r/technology ↗
    all of them →
  3. 6

    Mathematicians say OpenAI's methods are corroding the field

    The Economist reports top mathematicians outraged by OpenAI's methods, while other mathematicians and commentators warn the dynamic discourages young people from entering the field.

    “Mathematicians are unhappy about OpenAI. The gist of their argument is that they form a community that trains young people.”
    — @lemire
    1. 2 outlets first by HN Frontpage, 13d ago · also The Economist · read ↗

    • Techmeme@techhub.social

      OpenAI says it's no longer sponsoring Caltech's math hackathon, where participants use AI to solve research problems, following criticism of "slop mathematics" (Truman Dickerson/Business Insider) https://www. businessinsider.com/openai-cal tech-ai-math-hackathon-backlash-anthropic-2026-9 http://www. techmeme.com/260911/p13#a26091 1p13

      Techmeme@techhub.socialMastodon13d ago8▲view on Mastodon ↗
    2 more of the top 3 · 21 posts in this stretch
    • timfernholz.com

      meanwhile, 25 Fields Medal-winning mathematicians are calling out AI for threatening their work and culture

      timfernholz.comBluesky13d ago2▲view on Bluesky ↗
    • The researcher in the link [0] says that OpenAI offered to co write with him the paper about Navier Stokes theorem if he only agrees to not include his co researcher who was also working on this. I find this highly unethical by multi billion dollar organisations to arm twist small and big researchers like this.[0]

      GuestmodinfoHacker News13d agoview on Hacker News ↗
    all of them →
  4. 5

    OpenAI drops sponsorship of Caltech's AI math hackathon

    After an open letter from Caltech mathematicians warning of 'destructive impacts,' OpenAI withdraws as sponsor of a hackathon where participants use AI to attack research problems, amid criticism of 'slop mathematics.'

    “is likely to have destructive impacts for the mathematical community…”
    — Caltech mathematicians
    1. first by NYT, 14d ago · also Understanding AI, NYT Science

      1 more headline
    2. first by Mastodon, 13d ago · also Gizmodo

    3 more claims →
    • I think OpenAI and Anthropic are slowly feeling the pressure to GET SOME $$ or a plan for some $$ — they need to somehow generate some NETWORK EFFECTS and LOCK-IN. Without that there's no stability: selling ad hoc one-offs is much much too quaint! This is dawning on them like it dawned on Google when they stopped not being evil. Need... to…

      jamienkHacker News14d agoview on Hacker News ↗
    2 more of the top 3 · 30 posts in this stretch
    • peterrenshaw@ioc.exchange

      “He published a public statement this week accusing the AI company of trying to gazump him and his research partner Levent Alpöge, from # OpenAI 's rival # Anthropic , after hearing they were close to solving the problem. Professor Buckmaster also said the company offered to let write up their solution if he took his partner's name off the…

      peterrenshaw@ioc.exchangeMastodon13d agoview on Mastodon ↗
    • arthurzork.mstdn.party.ap.brid.gy

      OpenAI fought dirty on career-making math problem, says NYU mathematician | TechCrunch

      arthurzork.mstdn.party.ap.brid.gyBluesky14d agoview on Bluesky ↗
    all of them →
  5. 4

    Mathematicians demand proof OpenAI did not use their private work

    A second mathematician accuses OpenAI of 'dishonesty' about its training data as reporting spreads across outlets questioning where OpenAI's math breakthroughs actually come from.

    “since the completion of Navier-Stokes, we have made substantial progress on another Millennium Prize problem…”
    — OpenAI, AI company, via NYT · source
    1. 2 outlets first by HN Frontpage, 14d ago · also The Verge · read ↗

    2. first by HN Best, 15d ago · also HN Frontpage

    2 more claims →
    • This essentially confirms that OpenAI will soon have officially solved the next Millennium Problem. The rumors were true. Via New York Times “In addition, since the completion of Navier-Stokes, we have made substantial progress on another Millennium Prize problem. We are

      @kimmonismusX14d ago2.0k▲view on X ↗
    2 more of the top 3 · 24 posts in this stretch
    • On your second point: there is a more plausible explanation which David Bessis calls the "overhang". The short version is that there is a large amount of relatively low hanging fruits in mathematics, because no human has broad enough knowledge and enough time to try them all. AI is not constraint by that, and therefore can systematically pluck all…

      kzz102Hacker News14d agoview on Hacker News ↗
    • An N.Y.U. Mathematician Clashed With OpenAI Over a $1 Million Proof https://www. nytimes.com/2026/09/10/science /tristan-buckmaster-openai-math-navier-stokes.html?utm_source=flipboard&utm_medium=activitypub Posted into Most Emailed @ most-emailed-newyorktimes

      newyorktimes@flipboard.comMastodon14d agoview on Mastodon ↗
    all of them →
  6. 3

    OpenAI confirms progress on a second Millennium Prize problem

    Following NYT reporting on the Buckmaster clash, OpenAI states it has made substantial progress on another Millennium Prize problem beyond the completed Navier-Stokes work, confirming earlier rumors.

    1. 1 outlet first by New York Times, 14d ago · read ↗

    • tante@tldr.nettime.org

      The whole "OpenAI uses mathematicians' prompts to claim their models solved maths problems" seems to be a pattern... (Article title: Mathematicians want proof OpenAI didn’t use their work) https://www. theverge.com/ai-artificial-int elligence/993263/where-does-openai-get-mathematics-training-data

      tante@tldr.nettime.orgMastodon14d ago31▲view on Mastodon ↗
    2 more of the top 3 · 30 posts in this stretch
    • This is the second wake up call.Big AI companies (all of Big IT Tech really) are in data gathering and processing business. Also known as “intelligence”.Their final “product” is not just a standalone ML model. They don’t need your data just to “improve their products and services”. They build a whole ecosystem and infrastructure around gathering…

      thaway7388Hacker News14d agoview on Hacker News ↗
    • joanpla.mastodon.social.ap.brid.gy

      "OpenAI fought dirty on career-making math problem, says NYU mathematician"

      joanpla.mastodon.social.ap.brid.gyBluesky14d agoview on Bluesky ↗
    all of them →
  7. 2

    Andreas Thom accuses OpenAI of training on his private work too

    Mathematician Andreas Thom presents evidence on Mastodon suggesting OpenAI trained its Astra system on conversations he and Gábor Kun had while working on the non-sofic groups problem, widening the scandal beyond Buckmaster's case.

    “BREAKING: OpenAI might have stolen another major proof.”
    — @ValerioCapraro
    • BREAKING: OpenAI might have stolen another major proof. In a detailed Mastodon post, which I report in full in the comments, Andreas Thom presents several pieces of evidence suggesting that OpenAI may have trained Astra on conversations in which he and Gábor Kun were working on

      @ValerioCapraroX15d ago9.3k▲view on X ↗
  8. 1

    ReportOpenAI accused of using private Codex chats on Navier-Stokes

    Coverage surfaces claiming OpenAI mined mathematicians Tristan Buckmaster's and Levent Alpöge's private Codex sessions to get ahead on a Navier-Stokes proof, the first public airing of the dispute.

    • Lmao wtf, OpenAI is threatening mathematicians like the mafia. “Nice career, shame if something happened to it”

      @grogboganX16d agoview on X ↗

Also covered reported alongside — the timeline has no entry for these yet

  1. first by CBC, 12d ago · also The Verge

    1 more headline
  2. first by Guardian Science, 12d ago · also The Guardian

  3. first by ABC, 13d ago · also The Week

    1 more headline
  4. first by SingularityHub, 13d ago · also The Conversation

  5. first by NYT, 14d ago · also NYT Science

  6. first by HN Best, 14d ago · also HN Frontpage

  7. first by ABC Australia, 14d ago · also ABC News & Headlines – Australian Broadcasting Corporation

and 10 smaller pieces

What people are saying 9 voices from 4 sites · best of 129 · verbatim

Still unanswered
  • Was the model actually trained on the researchers' private prompts, or did it independently converge on the same approach?
  • Should AI-assisted or AI-derived proofs credit the human researchers whose unpublished work informed them, and how would that even be verified?