Nan Jiang says Bubeck unilaterally dictated who could stay on the paper
Nan JiangPersonal response to Bubeck's explanation
Argues that the proposed joint-credit arrangement improperly allowed one party to choose which other collaborator would receive authorship.
Responding to
Jiang argues that even an offer of authorship on OpenAI's proof did not justify unilaterally excluding the other team's collaborator.
“you unilaterally tried to dictate who from other side can stay on the paper”
Original post
Where this statement fits
Did OpenAI improperly pressure mathematicians over authorship and credit?
Tristan Buckmaster describes pressure over authorship and publication during discussions about competing AI-assisted mathematics results. Sébastien Bubeck disputes that characterization and says the proposed authorship concerned OpenAI's own proof. His apology for career-related wording does not settle the disagreement. Researchers and commentators divide over whether the negotiations were appropriate, while raising a separate dispute about the treatment of unpublished user research.
Source and context
Original post
About this source
Crucial follow-up explicitly acknowledges that the proposed authorship was on OpenAI's work, while maintaining his criticism of excluding the other collaborator.
Before the quotation
Responds after the authorship-context clarification.
After the quotation
Explicitly acknowledges in his thread that the proposal concerned OpenAI's work, but maintains the exclusion was objectionable.
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
A substantive criticism that survives the distinction between the two teams' proofs.
- Recorded on
- Published here
- People and groups discussed
- Sébastien Bubeck
More from this case
Read the full caseAGMAI calls OpenAI's release a first step, not an endorsement
Advisory Group on Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence
“AGMAI’s advisory role should not be interpreted as a judgment of the impact of these results or an endorsement of the process by which OpenAI obtained them.”Read statement
OpenAI describes steps to improve mathematical disclosures
OpenAI
“We will continue to act on feedback from the community and update our standards for future disclosures of major scientific advancements.”Read statement
AGMAI opposes using mathematical releases as marketing
Advisory Group on Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence
“We strongly recommend that AI labs refrain from treating the release of mathematical results as marketing vehicles to promote their models”Read statement
Share or embed this statement
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the statement page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Nan Jiang says Bubeck unilaterally dictated who could stay on the paper
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/294-argues-that-the-proposed-joint-credit-arrangement-improperly
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "Nan Jiang says Bubeck unilaterally dictated who could stay on the paper". First published: 2026-09-10. Last updated: 2026-09-30. https://disputeindex.com/events/294-argues-that-the-proposed-joint-credit-arrangement-improperly