理查德·博彻兹(Richard Borcherds)是一名UC伯克利教授和菲尔兹奖牌获得者，他不再为他的学生家庭作业打分。
在看到他的学生中有多少人使用AI来不断获得最高分后，他觉得给读者打分是“没有意义的”，因为AI的使用现在是不可避免的。
Borcherds在星期二的静坐采访中披露了这一点，此前OpenAI宣布AI agents显然解决了一个数学最难解决的问题
如果AI继续以目前的速度进步，那么，在几年内，人类数学家们将无所作为
Borcherds 称，他目前成绩优异，如果学生完成作业。 他承认这“不是一个非常好的制度”，但目前他别无选择。
Borcherds表示，他不再知道是否要鼓励学生进入数学系，因为五年前，作为数学家似乎是AI繁荣中最安全的职业之一。
“我不知道有什么建议。 我甚至问ChatGPT这个问题
称(称)在数学系虽有AI的发展
他比较了实际的纸质期刊，这些期刊尽管20年来“完全毫无意义”。
“过去有许多技术突破——手织布被隐蔽者放倒，马被汽车放倒等等。” 这是数学中第一次发生类似的事情。
根据Anne Marie Richard的电子邮件，大学本科教育助理副教授兼首席学术技术干事。 然而，关于AI使用的直接政策可以因课程级别和重点领域而大不相同。
校区尝试了若干人工智能检测工具，包括Turnitin和Rumi
AI课程政策由教职员斟酌决定，但根据Richard的说法，AI Hub的校园目录"AI工具，培训和政策"中已有的AI使用语句样本数据库越来越多，供教职员在他们的音节中使用。
本文由 AI图鉴自动抓取并翻译，版权归原作者所有；如需查看原文请点下方链接。
Richard Borcherds, a UC Berkeley professor and Fields medalist, no longer grades his students’ homework.
After seeing how many of his students used AI to consistently receive top scores, he felt there was “no point” in paying readers to grade for correctness in homework, as AI use is now unavoidable.
Borcherds revealed this in a sit-down interview Tuesday, following OpenAI’s announcement that AI agents apparently solved one of mathematics’ most difficult unsolved problems, the Navier-Stokes existence and smoothness problem.
“If AI continues to improve at present rate, then, in a few years, there’ll be nothing human mathematicians can do that AI can’t do better,” Borcherds said.
Borcherds said he currently grades on completion if a student hands in their homework. He admitted that it is “not a very good system,” but at the moment, he has no alternative.
Borcherds stated he no longer knows whether to encourage students to go into the math department, as it seemed five years ago that being a mathematician was one of the safest careers from the AI boom.
“I have no idea what to advise. I even asked ChatGPT this exact question, and even ChatGPT said it didn’t have any idea what was going to happen,” Borcherds said.
He described a plentiful amount of “inertia” in the academic system and said he wouldn’t be surprised if things stayed the same in the math department for a couple years despite AI developments.
He drew a comparison to physical paper journals, which publish even though they have been “utterly pointless” for two decades.
“There have been plenty of technical breakthroughs in the past — hand weaving was put out of business by looms, and horses were put out of business by motor cars, and so on,” Borcherds said. “This is the first time anything like this has happened in mathematics, though.”
The Berkeley Division of the Academic Senate asks that faculty include a statement about course expectations including the use of AI tools for coursework in course syllabi, according to an email from Anne Marie Richard, assistant vice provost for undergraduate education and chief academic technology officer. However, she said the direct policies on AI use can vary dramatically with course level and focus area.
Campus has tried several AI detection tools, including Turnitin and Rumi, but have determined that these tools aren’t adequate enough to be standardized on campus.
AI policy for classes is up to the discretion of faculty, but there is a growing database of sample AI use statements available in the AI Hub, the campus directory for AI tools, training and policies, for faculty to use in their syllabi, according to Richard.
Auto-fetched and translated by AI Atlas. All rights belong to the original author.