Nan Jiang on AI Research, Scientific Credit and Integrity

A sourced history of statements and actions associated with this topic.

Disputes over authorship, credit, research conduct and publication practices involving artificial intelligence and scientific work.

Scope: Covers attributable disagreements over contributions, publication pressure, collaboration and use of research material. Treats mathematical correctness, authorship conduct and data-access allegations as separate questions.

Condemned1Distinct events · September 8, 2026 — Selected filter; activate to remove.Defended or excused0Distinct events · No published events — Not selected; activate to add.Challenged the characterization0Distinct events · No published events — Not selected; activate to add.Minimized0Distinct events · No published events — Not selected; activate to add.Mixed or conditional0Distinct events · No published events — Not selected; activate to add.Explicitly stayed out0Distinct events · No published events — Not selected; activate to add.

Counts document individual events. They do not assign an overall position.

By category Timeline

Distinct documented events

Position history

1 event on this page. Dates: September 8, 2026

1 matching event. Dates: September 8, 2026

1 total published event. Dates: September 8, 2026

September 8, 2026Condemned
Addressed record
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”
Speaker capacity
Personal response to Bubeck's explanation
Editorial rationale
A substantive criticism that survives the distinction between the two teams' proofs.
Nan Jiang challenges the proposed authorship arrangements after Bubeck's clarification (opens in a new tab)
Crucial follow-up explicitly acknowledges that the proposed authorship was on OpenAI's work, while maintaining his criticism of excluding the other collaborator.

View context Did OpenAI improperly pressure mathematicians over authorship and credit?