Leiden Declaration on Artificial Intelligence and Mathematics

Signatories

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

Sign Declaration
4181 Signatories
  1. Adrian Detavernier ORCID Faculteit Ingenieurswetenschappen en Architectuur, Universiteit Gent
  2. Chen Qian verified email Xi'an Jiaotong University
  3. Raphael Appenzeller ORCID Heidelberg University
  4. Alessandro Della Corte ORCID Professor (Associate) of Mathematical Physics, Università degli Studi di Camerino
  5. Nikolaos Panagiotopoulos ORCID On Board Computers and Data Handling Engineer, European Space Research and Technology Centre
    Comment

    My affiliation does not reflect the ESA's viewpoint on AI. Furthermore, I would like to add that the current technology which has been baptised as "AI" is simple a group of algorithms (very good ones though) and are able to automate tedious mental work with high risks and error margins. It requires diligent investigation and background work (here is where the human intelligence is required most) before it is implemented on real world applications, in order to bring the desired benefits, always in the frame of logic and ethics.

  6. David Evans Prifysgol Caerdydd - Cardiff University
  7. Elima Shehu ORCID MathCoRe Postdoc, Otto-von-Guericke University Magdeburg
  8. Annegret Burtscher ORCID Associate Professor, Radboud University Nijmegen
  9. Alessandra Cattafi verified email University of Pisa
  10. Jiangyu Su verified email Fudan University
  11. Julien BREMONT ORCID Collège de France
  12. Hyeonwoo Kim verified email Pohang University of Science and Technology
  13. Leon Kester Transdisciplinary Scientist, TNO
    Comment

    Thank you so much for this initiative. I fully support the declaration and recommendations. I hope this and other initiatives evolve towards a transdisciplinary declaration on science and philosophy.

  14. André Schlichting ORCID Full Professor, Universität Ulm
  15. Johannes Lederer ORCID Chair of Data-Driven Mathematics at the University of Hamburg
    Comment

    No one knows what AI will bring tomorrow. But as mathematics community, we can—and should—take part in shaping that future.

  16. Alberto Gervani verified email Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa
  17. Ahmed Ratnani ORCID Director of The UM6P Vanguard Center, Université Mohammed VI Polytechnique
  18. Ingemar Kaj ORCID Uppsala University
  19. Jireh Loreaux ORCID Associate Professor, Southern Illinois University Edwardsville
    Comment

    While there any many further steps to be taken, the Leiden declaration is a good starting point.

  20. Rémy Degenne ORCID Researcher, Inria Centre at the University of Lille
  21. Giuseppe Alessio D'Inverno ORCID Postdoctoral Researcher, Laboratoire de Mathématiques d'Orsay, Université Paris-Saclay
  22. GIUSEPPE MOLTENI ORCID associate professor, University of Milan
  23. Mingcheng Wu ORCID Master Student, Shandong University
    Comment

    I strongly support the Leiden Declaration on AI and Mathematics. Preserving human authorship, transparency, and deep understanding in mathematics is crucial.

  24. Stephan Wagner ORCID TU Graz and Uppsala University
  25. Axel Flinth verified email Umeå University
  26. Yuriy Drozd ORCID Institute of Mathematics National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
  27. Olivier Hénard ORCID Assistant Professor (MCF), Université Paris Saclay
  28. Hendrik De Bie ORCID full professor, Ghent University
  29. Georgios Skantzaris verified email Eindhoven University of Technology
  30. Jess Stubbs ORCID Data Engineer (Student)
    Comment

    What I appreciate about this declaration is that it's not a tantrum. It's not "AI bad, stop everything." It's a precise community with a precise relationship to truth, asking a precise question: what happens to knowledge when the infrastructure of verification gets undermined faster than anyone can adapt? I just hope we're not too late...

  31. Matthew Bisatt verified email Adam Mickiewicz University of Poznan
  32. Perdita Stevens ORCID University of Edinburgh, Prof. Em. Mathematics of Software Engineering
  33. Evgeny Khukhro ORCID Emeritus Professor of Pure Mathematics, University of Lincoln, UK
  34. Bart de Keijzer ORCID Department of Informatics, King's College London
  35. Shouxi Wang verified email University of Warwick
  36. Carlo Mantegazza ORCID Math. Department, University of Naples Federico II
  37. Balasubramanian Sury ORCID
  38. Anton Fehnker ORCID PhD Student, University of Copenhagen
  39. Julian Berman ORCID Columbia University
  40. Raul Rojas ORCID University of Nevada Reno
  41. Florian K. Richter ORCID École Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne (EPFL)
  42. Danko R. Jocic verified email University of Belgrade
    Comment

    Every result in Mathematics should be categorized as (one of these): - HUMAN verified (standard) or - AI verified. Alternatively, if not verified by humans, every AI claim in Mathematics should be classified as: AI Mathematics. D.J.

  43. Juliet Floyd ORCID Borden Parker Bowne Professor of Philosophy, Boston University; Director, Boston University Center for the Humanities
    Comment

    We need such dialogue among professionals and others about our future with AI.

  44. Jan Draisma ORCID Universitat Bern
    Comment

    I find it amazing how such relatively simple models for the brain perform so well at tasks so far thought to be doable by humans only. This includes mathematical reasoning, and I am sure that these systems are here to stay. But on how they should be used in mathematical research, I wholeheartedly endorse the values and recommendations formulated out in this declaration. (Among the very real threats, I found that cognitive offloading might have been also included more prominently. Just like it is now very tempting for students to ask an LLM to do their homework, it will also be increasingly tempting for research mathematicians, and researchers in other areas, to delegate to a machine thinking that they would previously have done themselves. I am concerned about the long-term effects that this will have on our minds, and on humanity as a whole.)

  45. Michele Caselli ORCID Postdoctoral Researcher, The University of Sydney
  46. Bian Yang verified email Norwegian University of Science and Technology
    Comment

    A good initiative! But I'd suggest we use a more open and collaborative attitude towards industry and government. "Don’t believe the hype", "Regulate the artificial intelligence industry", ... maybe we can use better phrases (less emotional, more scientifically evidenced) to encourage the stakeholders to talk and find a solution together.

  47. Nicola Ciccoli ORCID University of Perugia
  48. Christian Clason ORCID Professor of Mathematical Optimization, Karl-Franzens-Universität Graz
  49. Zhihua Chen verified email KTH Royal Institute of Technology
  50. Frits Spieksma ORCID Mathematics and Computer Science, Technische Universiteit Eindhoven
  51. Enrique Alvarez Vazquez ORCID Researcher, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid
  52. Pierre Vandenhove ORCID Université de Mons
  53. Marc Corstanje ORCID Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam
  54. C. S. Rajan verified email Ashoka University
  55. Jeffrey Harvey ORCID Professor, University of Chicago
  56. Iqra Altaf ORCID Postdoc, UCLA.
  57. Simone Castellan ORCID Università degli studi di Parma
  58. Nicky Hekster ORCID Executive Professor, TIAS School for Business and Society
  59. Matthias Eberhardt
  60. Detlef Steuer ORCID Helmut-Schmidt-Universität Hamburg
  61. Katherine E. Stange ORCID Full Professor, University of Colorado Boulder
  62. Veronica Calvo Cortes ORCID PhD Researcher, Max Planck Institute for Mathematics in the Sciences
  63. Gerhard Weiss ORCID Professor, Maastricht University
  64. Yuhan Chi ORCID Fudan University
  65. Daniel Estévez ORCID Independent researcher
  66. Marco Streng ORCID Universiteit Leiden
  67. Stephane Mallat verified email Collège de France
  68. David Trillo ORCID
  69. Sife Shuo Wang ORCID
  70. Kim Batselier ORCID Delft University of Technology
  71. Arsham Mikaeili Namini ORCID McGill University
  72. Felipe Ponce-Vanegas ORCID Postdoc Fellow, Basque Center for Applied Mathematics
    Comment

    I am optimistic about the positive impact of AI on mathematics, and this includes making us rethink our role as mathematicians in society. But to move forward, it is important to identify and mitigate potential threats, such as impaired creativity because AI pushes us toward its own patterns of reasoning. This declaration brings up essential topics the community should address. [post written with assistance of ChatGPT to sound like a native speaker.]

  73. Innocent Maposa ORCID Dr, Stellenbosch University
    Comment

    I agree with the declaration

  74. Vandana Dwarka verified email Delft University of Technology
  75. Rogier Bos ORCID Assistant professor, Universiteit Utrecht
  76. Alexander Müller-Hermes verified email University of Oslo
  77. Alon Dogon ORCID PhD Student, Weizmann Institute of Science
  78. Christian Furrer ORCID Københavns Universitet
  79. Florian Metzger ORCID Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg
  80. Lorenzo Fantini ORCID École polytechnique
  81. Su Gao ORCID University Chair Professor, Nankai University
    Comment

    The Leiden Declaration comes at the right time and provides much needed recommendations to individual mathematicians, organizations and policy makers. I wholeheartedly endorse the recommendations in the Declaration. I view this as a great start -- now that we have found some sense of directions, the next step is for the mathematics community to take collective actions to maintain the integerity of mathematics as a human endeavor.

  82. Peter Bruin ORCID Universitair hoofddocent (associate professor), Universiteit Leiden
  83. Ruihua Wang ORCID Lecturer, Hainan Bielefeld University of Applied Sciences
  84. Lorenzo Clemente ORCID
  85. Leslie Ann Goldberg ORCID University of Oxford
  86. MAURICE J DUPRE verified email Tulane University
    Comment

    MATHEMATICS (My definition don’t blame anyone else): The ART of CREATING WAYS to HANDLE INFORMATION. As such, there are no rules other than those desired by Mathematicians to accomplish whatever purpose they have in mind. All living things must handle the information from their environment for survival. Except for humans, the WAYS are provided by evolution. Human requirements have outstripped evolution so all humans are forced to become Mathematicians. However, most use methods of little interest to others. Professional Mathematicians on the other hand develop ways which can be of wider interest. Computers only follow rules and algorithms, so even with AI are not at this time really doing mathematics, but simply a very complex version of calculation, and If they get to the level of GAI with human level AI, then the mathematics they produce is not guaranteed to be of interest to humans, and suffers from all the issues detailed in the LEIDEN DECLARATION, many of which are clearly dangerous.

  87. Gentian Zavalani ORCID PhD students, Scientists, CASUS Center for Advanced System Understanding
  88. Fabio Mogavero ORCID Associate Professor of Computer Science, Università degli Studi di Napoli Federico II
  89. Leo van Iersel ORCID TU Delft
  90. Maurizio Grasselli ORCID Politecnico di Milano
  91. Felix Lotter ORCID PhD Student, Max Planck Institute for Mathematics in the Sciences
  92. Jordi-Lluís Figueras Romero ORCID Uppsala University
  93. Jaclyn Lang ORCID Assistant Professor, Temple University
  94. Jörn Hatzky ORCID Researcher, QPS (Netherlands)
  95. Anh-Chi Tuan ORCID MSc student - Politecnico di Milano
  96. Gianluca Garello ORCID Associate professor, Università di Torino
  97. Stephen Preston ORCID Professor, CUNY Brooklyn College and Graduate Center
  98. Gian Maria Dall'Ara ORCID Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa, Istituto Nazionale di Alta Matematica "Francesco Severi"
  99. Natalie Packham ORCID Professor of Mathematics and Statistics, Berlin School of Economics and Law
  100. Moses Boudourides ORCID Northwestern University
    Comment

    I have signed the Leiden Declaration on AI in Research because I believe that artificial intelligence should strengthen, rather than replace, the fundamental principles of scholarship. As a researcher working at the intersection of network science, computational social science, and AI-assisted methodologies, I view AI as a powerful tool for discovery, synthesis, and scientific productivity. At the same time, scientific responsibility, intellectual accountability, transparency, reproducibility, and critical judgment remain irreducibly human responsibilities. The challenge before us is not whether AI should be used in research, but how it should be used. The future of science will be shaped not by a choice between humans and AI, but by thoughtful collaborations that combine computational capabilities with human understanding, creativity, and ethical responsibility. I therefore support the Leiden Declaration's call for preserving the values of scholarly inquiry while embracing the opportunities created by rapidly advancing AI technologies.