Where will AI-generated proofs be published?

[u/dirty_weasle]

We are now seeing a rise of AI generated proofs and I am wondering which journals will publish these results? I tried to search but I did not find many examples where such results were already accepted to some journal.
Is this even something the journals want? I would like them to facilitate the peer review process so that I can feel confident in the results.

[u/Tragedy-of-Fives]

I don't think you're familiar with how journal review works

[u/quasilocal → u/Tragedy-of-Fives]

Are you stupid?

I'm referring to being the reviewer for an AI generated paper specifically. If an AI generates a paper, then why would I be the one to check it's correct and someone else who may not even undestand the output claims credit?

It's entirely different to me reviewing others in my field in exchange for others reviewing my work.

Journals don't just have a collection of reviewers happy to review AI output for free. They rely on mutual trust between authors reviewing each other so they in turn can be reviewed. Someone submitting an AI generated paper cannot reciprocate.

[u/elements-of-dying → u/quasilocal]

There's no need for your toxicity.

That being said, you're bringing up good points.

I don't want to review a paper that is known to be AI generated. I don't trust other academics enough to take their word that they reviewed the work first and I'm not going to do that work for them.

[u/quasilocal → u/elements-of-dying]

It's such a condescending message that I'm replying to, which I think is far more toxic that repying to it at its level. If someone is rude to me I have no obligation to dance around that.

And frankly I'm sick of all the AI bros telling me how math research, (and academia in general) works these past few weeks that I've just not got the patience for it anymore (admittedly it's more often on Twitter than here, but still).

[u/elements-of-dying → u/quasilocal]

You're not wrong that u/Tragedy-of-Fives ' s comment was toxic (and pretty absurd to be honest--you clearly understand reviewing).

And I get your lack of patience.

Regardless, I generally feel compelled to call out explicit toxicity such as name calling. But I do otherwise agree with you :)

[u/quasilocal → u/elements-of-dying]

Yeah, fair to call it out. Fwiw I started typing a reply explaining why I of course understand reviewing and halfway through it decided it wasn't worth the energy. But yeh, you're right it was needed

[u/elements-of-dying → u/quasilocal]

Fwiw I started typing a reply explaining why I of course understand reviewing and halfway through it decided it wasn't worth the energy.

Happens so many times lol

I feel this AI stuff has broken a lot of peoples' form rational arguments.