Will Mathematicians be replaced by AI?
Deriving, multiplying, adding, subtracting, integrating, and dividing, Math is vital to our daily life like oxygen. To many of us, math is carbon dioxide rather than oxygen– it is suffocating. What's the point of this loathsome process? What’s the meaning of all those calculations? What’s the meaning of all those numbers?
These are the questions that always trouble me. If we have the TI-84 or Symbolab or Desmos what is the point of learning how to calculate? I often look at the messy calculations on my notepad and the detailed steps on the website, feeling confused.
However, AI might only be able to solve the calculation dilemmas, but they can not synthesize their own thesis. Research done by Cambridge University states, “Humans are usually pretty good at recognising when they get things wrong, but artificial intelligence systems are not. According to a new study, AI generally suffers from inherent limitations due to a century-old mathematical paradox.”
However, one of the most prevalent problems with artificial intelligence is the inconsistency of the system. For example, Symbolab is unable to solve the problem above due to the complexity of the function. Yet, in ChatGPT the machine manages to synthesize an answer to the equation but fails to provide an explanation, rather it provides some steps and references. ChatGPT has a function of “regenerate response” which somehow manages to imitate the human ability to find its own mistakes, however, ChatGPT failed to reframe its thoughts in a different way, rather it simply checks whether its last response contains any mistakes.
Moreover, a Chinese math tutor Garfield Song mentions, “ChatGPT is able to solve problems from Precalculus all the way up to AP Calculus AB and some parts of BC, but it's impossible to generate its own synthesis when the math problem involves one or more mathematical concepts.”
Moreover, this also highlights the necessity of mastering more than one subject and finding the amazement of the intersection of topics in an interdisciplinary manner. For example, a student from Brown University wrote about his encounter between artificial Intelligence and its entrance into a human-like position: “AI will never interpret the subtle feelings between people.”
“Because by our nature, we all want a human touch and people will always be the most critical resource any organization has. The key is to empower them with intelligent technology to achieve more,”
said Matt Rumen, a journalist in Technative. He strongly suggests in his article that AI will never be able to replace human intelligence, and the calculations by humans (even though they could be inaccurate) always add a special touch of feelings and emotions to the work and the thesis they wrote. I guess this process of adding and emotionalizing with the work is something that AI can never replicate.