Peter Woit asks OpenAI to disclose exactly how its math result was done
Peter WoitSigned author of Not Even Wrong
Calls for experimental-science-style disclosure of the methods used to obtain AI-generated mathematical results, including prompts, data and timing.
Responding to
Woit argues AI-assisted mathematical announcements should disclose methods, prompts, training data and timing so priority and process can be examined.
“exactly how was this done?”
Analysis
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divide over whether the negotiations were appropriate, while raising a separate dispute about the treatment of unpublished user research.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
Analysis
About this source
Signed essay calls for detailed methods, prompt and training disclosure. It also discusses rumors; the case does not adopt those rumors as facts.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Before the quotation
Discusses the announcement and the competing narratives about how the result was obtained.
After the quotation
His essay includes rumors and acknowledges limited expertise on the specific problem; those are not adopted as findings.
How this statement is classified
The label describes this statement's response within the context above.
Why this label?
Woit’s own essay criticizes secrecy, demands methodological disclosure and attacks ungrounded representations. His uncertainty about priority and hope for useful AI do not oppose that criticism.
- Recorded on
- Published here
- People and groups discussed
- OpenAI
Corrections to this statement
These notices document reporting corrections, classification changes, and topic-label updates.
Classification correction
Correction to: Statement by Peter Woit
- Previous classification
- Mixed or conditional. Concrete process demand without claiming independently to have established the disputed facts.
- Corrected classification
- Condemns. Woit’s own essay criticizes secrecy, demands methodological disclosure and attacks ungrounded representations. His uncertainty about priority and hope for useful AI do not oppose that criticism.
We corrected the editorial classification of Peter Woit's response about OpenAI’s lack of transparent scientific methods and substantiation. Woit’s own essay criticizes secrecy, demands methodological disclosure and attacks ungrounded representations. His uncertainty about priority and hope for useful AI do not oppose that criticism. This corrects our labeling, not a later change in the speaker's position.
This corrects an editorial classification.
Signed essay calls for detailed methods, prompt and training disclosure. It also discusses rumors; the case does not adopt those rumors as facts.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)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
- Peter Woit asks OpenAI to disclose exactly how its math result was done
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/events/301-calls-for-experimental-science-style-disclosure-of-the
Last updated marks the most recent saved version of this published statement.
The Dispute Index. "Peter Woit asks OpenAI to disclose exactly how its math result was done". First published: 2026-09-10. Last updated: 2026-09-30. https://disputeindex.com/events/301-calls-for-experimental-science-style-disclosure-of-the