Timeline for ChatGPT strikes MathOverflow
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
25 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 31 at 5:11 | history | edited | Alex M. |
edited tags
|
|
| May 30 at 22:32 | review | Close votes | |||
| Jun 4 at 3:04 | |||||
| May 30 at 19:56 | history | edited | Christopher King |
edited tags
|
|
| Jan 9, 2023 at 18:25 | comment | added | Martin Brandenburg | Unfortunately, ChatGPT answers get posted more and more on MO ... The most recent example is mathoverflow.net/users/497569/amit-luthra who deleted all of this "answers" right after I called him out. A few weeks ago something similar happened. I suspect a huge dark figure. | |
| Dec 26, 2022 at 7:31 | comment | added | მამუკა ჯიბლაძე | Very strange. My experience with it shows clearly that it is nowhere near the level of generating any sensible mathematics. For example, it repeats the same logical error again and again no matter how many times I tell it that it is an error, this kind of thing. | |
| Dec 22, 2022 at 18:00 | comment | added | Marsault Chabat | @DmitriPavlov So I didn't know those were fake references (the answer was canceled very quickly). That's why I was asking how did you understand. Anyway, now I understand. | |
| Dec 22, 2022 at 17:53 | comment | added | Marsault Chabat | @DmitriPavlov just because I haven't looked at the references. StackExchange is based on a system that allows us to trust people who are authorized to write an answer, so if anyone gives me references, I assume that these are indeed references... | |
| Dec 22, 2022 at 17:44 | comment | added | Dmitri Pavlov | @MarsaultChabat: All three “references” provided in the “answer” were entirely fictional: papers with such names simply do not exist. How exactly do you find this acceptable? | |
| Dec 22, 2022 at 12:49 | comment | added | Marsault Chabat | One of the questions was mine, and I read the answer and found it acceptable (it was actually a request for references). How did you figure out it was GPT? And how did you understand it in general? | |
| Dec 13, 2022 at 19:40 | comment | added | Tim Campion Mod | @TymaGaidash You can still see the deleted answers although unfortunately you need a relatively high reputation threshold (10k) to do this. We did consider whether the answers should not be deleted (for posterity's sake) but ultimately decided that wouldn't be fair to the individual questioners, as it would distract from their actual questions. But Martin Brandenburg's discussion below of one of the answers is quite typical, I think. You can also experiment for yourself if you're curious (but please don't post this stuff as answers here). | |
| Dec 12, 2022 at 21:22 | comment | added | Carlo Beenakker | this problem could be resolved by watermarking GPT output, as discussed in scottaaronson.blog/?p=6823 | |
| Dec 12, 2022 at 1:48 | comment | added | Тyma Gaidash | What did their answers say before they were deleted? | |
| Dec 11, 2022 at 15:48 | comment | added | Yemon Choi | @LSpice I guess the moderators have their own ways of knowing, but oddly the question you link to seems less accurate than the chatbot, e.g. mis-spelling 'cyclotomic' as 'cyclomatic'. It's possible that a chatbot was used to generate parts of the question but not all of it, although that seems less likely than either 'none' or 'all' | |
| Dec 11, 2022 at 0:07 | comment | added | LSpice | Is Are some Galois representations vector bundles? another example? | |
| Dec 10, 2022 at 19:55 | comment | added | Paul Taylor | Also on The Register - the online news site for the IT industry. | |
| Dec 10, 2022 at 16:26 | comment | added | Sam Hopkins | @MartinSleziak: gotcha. I guess I was reading between the lines with that moderator statement about detection of AI-generated content. | |
| Dec 9, 2022 at 22:22 | answer | added | Tim CampionMod | timeline score: 56 | |
| Dec 9, 2022 at 20:37 | answer | added | Martin Brandenburg | timeline score: 24 | |
| Dec 9, 2022 at 6:28 | comment | added | Martin Sleziak | @SamHopkins I did not see anything about automatic detection. (Of course, I might have missed something. There was a lot on this topic recently.) There is this question with an answer from SO mod: How can we enforce the ChatGPT ban?. They say that they do not want to share information about detection of such posts publicly, but they share some such info with other mods. (I do not know whether the MO mods are members of the moderators team, but they definitely have access to Teachers' Lounge.) | |
| Dec 9, 2022 at 5:52 | comment | added | Gerry Myerson | Also under discussion at math.stackexchange meta: What is our policy on AI-generated content? | |
| Dec 9, 2022 at 3:58 | comment | added | Sam Hopkins | @MartinSleziak: is the upshot from your links that there is already some automatic AI answer-detection applied to all stack exchange sites? Or is there anything more MO could do? | |
| Dec 9, 2022 at 0:46 | comment | added | Tim Campion Mod | The relevant user has been suspended and their posts deleted. Looking forward, it's worth having a discussion about our attitude toward this sort of thing in the future. | |
| Dec 8, 2022 at 23:34 | history | became hot meta post | |||
| Dec 8, 2022 at 21:54 | comment | added | Martin Sleziak | This seems to be a recent topic on several other sites as well. For example this post on Meta Stack Exchange: Ban ChatGPT network-wide (and the questions linked there). Or Meta Stack Overflow: Temporary policy: ChatGPT is banned (and the questions linked there). | |
| Dec 8, 2022 at 21:49 | history | asked | Dmitri Pavlov | CC BY-SA 4.0 |