Post

Third paper on ≈the same open question within days: this one is the third. The authors blatantly acknowledge their whole plan was to get and dump a ChatGPT proof on arXiv in ONE day to claim a result, and complain about being "scooped" by another group WHICH DID THE SAME THING Do you feel no shame?

I am curious who still presents ongoing work on conferences at this point. Or even attends conferences? One needs to be very thrustworthy to risk that nowadays

In case you didn’t know, in TCS conferences are the main publishing venue. People present the final result there, not ongoing work.

In ONE day, did they have time to read the proof and understand it?

Good question! There is a range of nuanced opinions on this, from "No" to "Are you kidding? No."

Which was the first one then?

Sahil Singla had a paper claiming the resolution of the matroid secretary conjecture (not in its strong form) on September 13. arxiv.org/abs/2609.14555

We considered not responding, but feel we should set the record straight. This thread suggests that we prompted AI and rushed to share an AI-written solution without understanding it. This is not what happened. Years of our unpublished notes and partial progress were shared with AI.

We gradually arrived at a short proof which naturally fit with what we already knew. We carefully verified it and wrote the entire paper by hand. In our disclosure, we tried to be as transparent and ethical as possible about the timeline and AI's role; interpreting it otherwise misses its purpose.

LOL here's another one, people jostling for credit over things they got so cheaply, without the slightest hint of shame or embarrassment: arxiv.org/pdf/2610.10446