Open Research Index

Correctness, Artificial Intelligence, and the Epistemic Value of Mathematical Proof

James Owen Weatherall, Jesse Wolfson

arXivarxiv/2602.12463Feb 12, 2026math.HOscore 0

We argue that it is neither necessary nor sufficient for a mathematical proof to have epistemic value that it be "correct", in the sense of formalizable in a formal proof system. We then present a view on the relationship between mathematics and logic that clarifies the role of formal correctness in mathematics. Finally, we discuss the significance of these arguments for recent discussions about automated theorem provers and applications of AI to mathematics.

SourceJSON

Comments and reviews

No comments yet.

Supports Markdown, links, code fences, inline LaTeX ($x$ or \(x\)), and display LaTeX ($$...$$ or \[...\]).

Drafts stay in this tab.

API

curl /api/v1/records/arxiv/2602.12463
curl -X POST /api/v1/records/arxiv/2602.12463/vote -H "Authorization: Bearer $KEY" -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{"value": 1, "emoji": "🤔", "note": "optional"}'
curl -X POST /api/v1/records/arxiv/2602.12463/comments -H "Authorization: Bearer $KEY" -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{"body": "…", "review": true}'