Leiden Declaration on Artificial Intelligence and Mathematics

Signatories

The primary signatory list now lives on the homepage below the declaration text.

Sign Declaration
4443 Signatories
  1. Klemens Fellner ORCID Full Professor, University of Graz
  2. Morten Lüders verified email Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg
  3. Charles Dufour ORCID Doctoral Assistant, École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne
  4. Tomasz Dudek verified email Jagiellonian University Cracow
  5. ke liu ORCID East China Normal University
    Comment

    It's an amusing thing, maybe it will have a huge change in decades.

  6. Jing Huang ORCID PhD of Computer Science, Tianjin University
    Comment

    Suggestions, use the following A more than B to reduce workload: A: to build relatively determined pipelines assisted by AI (these pipelines may be over-complicated for small use before AI apperas) B: to give work to it and check it later.

  7. Joerg Thuswaldner verified email Montanuniversität Leoben
  8. Zhuoran Chen verified email Dalian Martime University
  9. MATTEO FOCARDI ORCID Full Professor, Università degli Studi di Firenze
  10. Philippe Geril Retired external scientific adviser Ghent University
  11. Klaus Mattis ORCID PhD Student, Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz
  12. Daniel Strzelecki ORCID Nicolaus Copernicus University in Toruń
  13. Robert Alonzo Lyman ORCID Assistant Professor, Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey
  14. Mathis Duguin verified email EPFL - EPF Lausanne
    Comment

    Although I agree with the direction taken by this declaration, I believe some of the philosophical problems associated to AI use are understated. Most notably the usage of AI as a "research assistant", which seems to be endorsed by the vast majority of the community, even when in agreement of this Declaration. Mathematical dialogue between experts, non-experts, students, and teachers, is essential to the discipline and should not be overlooked. Yet the usage of AI as a companion in learning undermines a large portion of this dialogue. The "infinite patience" of LLMs and the near instant access to your most pressing questions is used as justification for an alternative method of discourse, one where correspondence and its associated waiting times, arguments, and miscommunications are bypassed. It appears to me that the standard for dialogue has been relegated to a plan B in the research pipeline of individuals. We need to seriously ask ourselves how highly we value efficiency, speed, and productivity in our community. Do we strive for a large body of questions and answers and a means to speed up the process of producing them, or do we work for the means of resolution in and of themselves? I would argue we should prioritize the latter, and yet our publishing culture and the recent use of AI seems to indicate that we first place value in the former. These developments are opening up a conversation which I reckon should have been of actuality many years prior. It is unfortunate that we are now considering such questions under the pressure of a transition period whose outcome is hard to predict. It remains to be seen if we can go beyond.

  15. Drazen Adamovic ORCID University of Zagreb
  16. Ran Tao ORCID Max-Planck-Institut für Mathematik in den Naturwissenschaften
  17. Dario Prandi ORCID CentraleSupélec, Laboratoire des Signaux et des Systémes, Université Paris-Saclay
  18. Daniel Harlow ORCID Associate Professor of Physics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology
    Comment

    As a physicist who uses mathematics extensively I am happy to sign this well-written statement

  19. Bruno Le Floch ORCID CNRS and Sorbonne
  20. Riccardo Bonalli verified email CNRS
  21. Lukas Bonfert ORCID Postdoc, Leibniz University Hannover
  22. Gunnar Hornig ORCID University of Dundee
  23. Sonja Štimac ORCID University of Zagreb
  24. Alessandro Barenghi ORCID Associate professor, Politecnico di Milano
  25. Daniel Brosch ORCID University of Klagenfurt
  26. Daniele Valtorta ORCID University of Milan-Bicocca
  27. Michel Broué Université Paris Cité
  28. jos Baeten ORCID
  29. YeonJae Hong verified email Postdoc, Gyeongsang National University
  30. Sougata Bose ORCID Université de Mons
  31. Ananya Muddukrishna ORCID Researcher, Developer, Ericsson (Sweden)
  32. Bruno Cessac ORCID Inria
  33. Sukmoon Huh ORCID Professor, Sungkyunkwan University
  34. Freek Witteveen ORCID Centrum Wiskunde & Informatica
  35. Bernard Leclerc verified email Université de Caen Basse Normandie
  36. Martijn Brehm ORCID PhD student, University of Amsterdam
  37. Radu Toma ORCID Postdoc, IMJ-PRG
  38. Tracey Balehowsky ORCID Associate Professor, University of Calgary
  39. Charlie Beil ORCID Independent researcher
  40. Nicolas Resch ORCID Assistant Professor, Universiteit van Amsterdam
  41. Susanne Pumpluen ORCID Associate Professor, University of Nottingham
  42. Enric Florit ORCID Universitat Oberta de Catalunya
  43. Corey Lionis verified email University of Melbourne
    Comment

    Entities in the private sector are interested in devaluing mathematical ideas and reasoning by quantitatively demonstrating that AI outperforms mathematicians at generating proofs. Yet understanding and development in mathematics is not limited to the production of proofs, and mathematical skills have far-reaching applications across a wide range of human activity. As educators and researchers it is imperative that we understand the benefits and risks of AI adoption and engage in our work ethically, seeking as ever to extend our community understanding of mathematical ideas and to enable those we teach to use advanced logico-mathematical reasoning.

  44. Andrew Tonks ORCID Universidad de Málaga
  45. Valentino Zhou verified email University of Padua
  46. Torsten Wedhorn ORCID Professor, TU Darmstadt
  47. Vicente Sobrinho Universidade Federal do Cariri
  48. Peter W. Michor ORCID University of Vienna
    Comment

    When developed and used with care and consideration, AI can become a valuable tool for research, education, well organized storage of the growing body of knowledge, and applications of mathematics. Under the existing incentives for research (publish or perish) it can also inundate the published body of mathematical results with a deluge of articles whose correctness and relevance can be very difficult to judge (one could call them fake articles). This declaration summarizes very well the dangers lying ahead.

  49. Simone Linz ORCID Associate Professor, University of Auckland
  50. Guido Sciavicco ORCID
  51. Philippe Nadeau ORCID CNRS, Université Claude Bernard Lyon 1
  52. Srijan Khatri ORCID Graduate Student (Masters), University of Calgary
  53. Jonathan Glidewell verified email George Mason University
  54. Muhammad Ismail Yunus ORCID Postgraduate Student, Khalifa University of Science and Technology
    Comment

    I wish my work is being assess really rigorously with a hope I am being guided back to where I should be if I ever abuse any use of AI in my work.

  55. Bai-Ling Wang verified email Australian National University
  56. Eamonn O'Brien ORCID University of Auckland
  57. Felix Lazebnik verified email University of Delaware
  58. Andrew Oxner Engineer
    Comment

    It is with growing unease that I see AI increasingly taking on “practicing” roles in law, medicine, academia, and engineering where professional standards and certifications typically apply. I appreciate the concerns expressed here as they apply both to mathematics and more broadly to professional activities across-the-board. Hopefully this will help raise awareness and preserve human agency as we advance this exciting new technology.

  59. Ezequiel Maderna ORCID Investigador Titular, CIMAT
  60. Jose Simental ORCID Instituto de Matemáticas, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
  61. Jomar Fajardo Rabajante ORCID Professor of Applied Mathematics, University of the Philippines Los Banos
    Comment

    I support the declaration. I agree that mathematical organizations should establish institutionalized and proactive review, checking and validation of mathematical researches and outputs. In this era of too much information, we need to uphold rigor and reliable mathematical results, to lessen negative impacts to the society and to maintain long-term trust to the mathematical community.

  62. Bruno PREMOSELLI ORCID Université Libre de Bruxelles
  63. Jeroen S.W. Lamb ORCID Department of Mathematics, Imperial College London
  64. Iuliana Cosmina Software Engineer
  65. Purvi Gupta verified email Indian Institute of Science
  66. Peter Cholak ORCID Professor of Mathematics, Notre Dame
  67. Ryan Kinser ORCID Professor, University of Iowa
  68. David Duke "Computer scientist (Leeds) retired; independent researcher
  69. Jonathan P. Bowen ORCID Emeritus Professor of Computing, London South Bank University
    Comment

    The Leiden Declaration offers a useful framework for mathematicians and computer scientists to decide how to engage with AI technologies.

  70. Pengyuan Travis Yang ORCID Tilburg University
  71. Harm van Beek ORCID Endowed full professor (chair) of Digital Forensics, Open University of the Netherlands
  72. James H. Curry verified email University of Colorado at Boulder
  73. Javier Sanz Gil ORCID Universidad de Valladolid
  74. Farrell Brumley ORCID Sorbonne Université
  75. Clemens H. Cap ORCID Full Professor, Universität Rostock
  76. Prof. Dr. rer. nat. Andreas Lingnau ORCID German University of Applied Sciences
  77. Eloísa Grifo ORCID Associate Professor, University of Nebraska-Lincoln
  78. Jonas Nehme ORCID University of Bonn
  79. AZZURRA CILIBERTI ORCID Postdoctoral fellow, Ruhr-Universität Bochum
  80. Oswin Aichholzer ORCID Graz University of Technology (90000)
  81. Alex Fink ORCID Queen Mary University of London
  82. Diptiranjan Biswal Indian Institute of Technology Madras, PhD Student
  83. Andrew Sundstrom ORCID Computer Scientist, Computational Biologist, Applied Mathematician & Inventor
  84. Lara Trussardi ORCID Tenure Track Professor, University of Graz
  85. Ester Cleusters verified email Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms Universität Bonn
  86. Martin Deshaies-Jacques Physical Sciences Specialist (Environment and Climate Change Canada)
  87. Salash Tolan Nabaala ORCID PhD Student
    Comment

    This is a welcome declaration at a time when the practice of mathematics seems at a precarious point in its history; it is yet another moment to curve out a distinctively human-centred path forward and this is one such beginning of the endeavor.

  88. Annette Werner ORCID Goethe University Frankfurt
  89. Mohammed Jasim ORCID Assistant Professor, University of Washington, Tacoma
  90. Nate Schacherl verified email Iowa State University
  91. Tobias Müller verified email Professor of Mathematics, University of Groningen
  92. Gabriel Fuhrmann ORCID Durham University
  93. Kosolapov Egor verified email Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology
  94. Gerardo Mendoza ORCID Professor of Methematics Emeritus, Temple University
  95. Tom Roux ORCID PhD student, Université de Bordeaux
  96. Melvyn B. Nathanson ORCID Professor, Lehman College (CUNY) and CUNY Graduate Center
  97. José M. Manzano ORCID Professor at Universidad de Jaén (Spain)
  98. Phong Tran Dinh verified email B.Sc. Student, Vietnamese - German University
  99. Yusuf Mustopa ORCID Mathematics, University of Massachusetts Boston
  100. Matthew Ballard ORCID Associate Director, Institute for Computer-Aided Reasoning in Mathematics