← back to claim Community acceptance of a proof has historically required a human-comprehensible narrative, as shown by the 14-year gap in the Kepler conjecture case

evidence graph

cited by (1)
[+0] By 2035 a machine-generated proof of a previously open Annals-level conjecture will be formally verified in Lean and accepted without a human-written proof sketch discuss [i] ai-forecasting formal-verification
Community acceptance of a proof has historically required a human-comprehensible narrative, as shown by the 14-year gap in the Kepler conjecture case
opposes (1)
[+0] Journals accepting formalized-only submissions grew from 0 to 3 between 2025 and 2029, but all three require an accompanying informal exposition discuss [i] publishing
whole evidence graph shown depth 1 2 3 both pro con
what the marks mean
  • supports · opposes · cites this claim · the claim you are reading
  • [+9] net votes on the evidence link — whether this is good evidence here, not whether the claim itself is true
  • Af··· accurate, falsifiable, clear, novel, important — a capital is established, lowercase weak, unrated; no strip at all where nothing has been rated yet
  • [?] no score has been computed for that claim yet
  • field shown only where a claim's fields differ from the one above it, so a field marks where the argument crosses into another
inspector

Select a link’s marker to see who asserted it, why, and what it cites.