Tootfinder

Opt-in global Mastodon full text search. Join the index!

@arXiv_quantph_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-08-20 09:55:00

Schr\"odingerization for quantum linear systems problems
Yin Yang, Yue Yu, Long Zhang
arxiv.org/abs/2508.13510 arxiv.org/pdf/2508.1351…

@arXiv_mathNA_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-09-19 09:25:01

On the extension of a class of Hermite bivariate interpolation problems
Hakop Hakopian, Anush Khachatryan
arxiv.org/abs/2509.14359 arxiv.or…

@arXiv_mathNT_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-08-20 09:11:50

Galois module structures and the Hasse principle in twist families via the distribution of Selmer groups
Alex Bartel, Adam Morgan
arxiv.org/abs/2508.14026

@arXiv_mathOC_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-08-19 09:45:40

An inexact variable metric proximal linearization method for composite optimization over embedded submanifolds
Hao He, Ruyu Liu, Yitian Qian, Shaohua Pan
arxiv.org/abs/2508.12003

@arXiv_mathAP_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-07-10 12:58:53

Replaced article(s) found for math.AP. arxiv.org/list/math.AP/new
[1/1]:
- Strong relaxation limit and uniform time asymptotics of the Jin-Xin model in the $L^{p}$ framework
Timoth\'ee Crin-Barat, Ling-Yun Shou, Jianzhong Zhang
arxiv.org/abs/2311.04105 mastoxiv.page/@arXiv_mathAP_bo
- Long time regularity for 3d gravity waves with vorticity
Daniel Ginsberg, Fabio Pusateri
arxiv.org/abs/2401.10096 mastoxiv.page/@arXiv_mathAP_bo
- Wasserstein Gradient Flows of MMD Functionals with Distance Kernel and Cauchy Problems on Quantil...
Richard Duong, Viktor Stein, Robert Beinert, Johannes Hertrich, Gabriele Steidl
arxiv.org/abs/2408.07498 mastoxiv.page/@arXiv_mathAP_bo
- Regularity of solutions for degenerate or singular fully nonlinear integro-differential equations
Jiangwen Wang, Feida Jiang
arxiv.org/abs/2408.14779 mastoxiv.page/@arXiv_mathAP_bo
- An overview of the stability of Sobolev inequalities on Riemannian manifolds with Ricci lower bounds
Francesco Nobili
arxiv.org/abs/2412.05935 mastoxiv.page/@arXiv_mathAP_bo
- The $\mathcal{M}$-Operator and Uniqueness of Nonlinear Kinetic Equations
Ricardo Alonso, Maria Pia Gualdani, Weiran Sun
arxiv.org/abs/2506.20775 mastoxiv.page/@arXiv_mathAP_bo
- Magnetic Stabilization of Compressible Flows: Global Existence in 3D Inviscid Non-Isentropic MHD ...
Jiahong Wu, Fuyi Xu, Xiaoping Zhai
arxiv.org/abs/2507.00888 mastoxiv.page/@arXiv_mathAP_bo
- Free boundary regularity for a tumor growth model with obstacle
Giulia Bevilacqua, Matteo Carducci
arxiv.org/abs/2507.02837 mastoxiv.page/@arXiv_mathAP_bo
- Three bound states with prescribed angular momentum to the cubic-quintic NLS equations in $\mathb...
Shuai Yao, Juntao Sun
arxiv.org/abs/2507.04057 mastoxiv.page/@arXiv_mathAP_bo
- Some remarks on a mathematical model for water flow in porous media with competition between tran...
Judita Runczikov\'a, Jan Chleboun, Chiara Gavioli, Pavel Krej\v{c}\'i
arxiv.org/abs/2405.10751 mastoxiv.page/@arXiv_mathNA_bo
- SDEs with critical general distributional drifts: sharp solvability and blow ups
D. Kinzebulatov, R. Vafadar
arxiv.org/abs/2506.09244 mastoxiv.page/@arXiv_mathPR_bo
- One sided orthogonal polynomials and a pointwise convergence result for $SU(2)$-valued nonlinear ...
Michel Alexis, Gevorg Mnatsakanyan, Christoph Thiele
arxiv.org/abs/2507.05124 mastoxiv.page/@arXiv_mathCA_bo
toXiv_bot_toot

@arXiv_mathGM_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-08-19 09:38:20

Divisibility and Sequence Properties of $\sigma^ $ and $\varphi^ $
Sagar Mandal
arxiv.org/abs/2508.11660 arxiv.org/pdf/2508.11660

@arXiv_mathCO_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-07-17 09:30:00

Spectral extremal problems for non-bipartite graphs without odd cycles
Lantao Zou, Lihua Feng, Yongtao Li
arxiv.org/abs/2507.11817

@tiotasram@kolektiva.social
2025-09-13 12:42:44

Obesity & diet
I wouldn't normally share a positive story about the new diet drugs, because I've seen someone get obsessed with them who was at a perfectly acceptable weight *by majority standards* (surprise: every weight is in fact perfectly acceptable by *objective* standards, because every "weight-associated" health risk is its own danger that should be assessed *in individuals*). I think two almost-contradictory things:
1. In a society shuddering under the burden of metastasized fatmisia, there's a very real danger in promoting the new diet drugs because lots of people who really don't need them will be psychologically bullied into using them and suffer from the cost and/or side effects.
2. For many individuals under the assault of our society's fatmisia, "just ignore it" is not a sufficient response, and also for specific people for whom decreasing their weight can address *specific* health risks/conditions that they *want* to address that way, these drugs can be a useful tool.
I know @… to be a trustworthy & considerate person, so I think it's responsible to share this:
#Fat #Diet #Obesity

@arXiv_condmatsoft_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-09-18 08:23:01

The influence of dimensional crossover on phase transitions and critical phenomena in condensed systems
O. V. Chalyi, E. V. Zaitseva
arxiv.org/abs/2509.13799

@arXiv_mathAP_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-08-18 08:18:00

$\mathrm{L}^p$-based Sobolev theory for PDEs on closed manifolds of class $C^m$
Gonzalo A. Benavides, Ricardo H. Nochetto, Mansur Shakipov
arxiv.org/abs/2508.11109

@arXiv_csDS_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-07-16 07:53:51

Solving Linear Programs with Differential Privacy
Alina Ene, Huy Le Nguyen, Ta Duy Nguyen, Adrian Vladu
arxiv.org/abs/2507.10946

@arXiv_mathCO_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-09-16 11:07:16

Balancing Extensions in Posets of Large Width
Max Aires, Jeff Kahn
arxiv.org/abs/2509.11549 arxiv.org/pdf/2509.11549

@arXiv_quantph_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-07-17 13:27:51

Replaced article(s) found for quant-ph. arxiv.org/list/quant-ph/new
[1/2]:
- Polynomial-time Solver of Tridiagonal QUBO, QUDO and Tensor QUDO problems with Tensor Networks
Alejandro Mata Ali, I\~nigo Perez Delgado, Marina Ristol Roura, Aitor Moreno Fdez. de Leceta

@arXiv_mathNA_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-07-17 08:15:50

State-based approach to the numerical solution of Dirichlet boundary optimal control problems for the Laplace equation
Ulrich Langer, Richard L\"oscher, Olaf Steinbach, Huidong Yang
arxiv.org/abs/2507.11646

@arXiv_csLG_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-09-04 10:26:41

Tabular foundation model for GEOAI benchmark problems BM/AirportSoilProperties/2/2025
Taiga Saito, Yu Otake, Stephen Wu
arxiv.org/abs/2509.03191

@jorgecandeias@mastodon.social
2025-07-10 14:12:29

Two things on this:
1 - To protect people from deepfakes has merit and is very, very needed. Urgently, even.
2 - Every single time people tried to use copyright law to do stuff copyright law is not intended to do, the results were catastrophic. No problems were solved that way, and new problems were created.
Stop it. Just stop.

@arXiv_mathGT_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-07-01 09:28:23

Unknotting number is not additive under connected sum
Mark Brittenham, Susan Hermiller
arxiv.org/abs/2506.24088 arxiv…

@arXiv_mathOC_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-08-12 09:52:33

Near-Optimal Convergence of Accelerated Gradient Methods under Generalized and $(L_0, L_1)$-Smoothness
Alexander Tyurin
arxiv.org/abs/2508.06884

@arXiv_mathCO_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-09-10 09:23:11

New constructions and bounds for nonabelian Sidon sets with applications to Tur\'an-type problems
John Byrne, Michael Tait
arxiv.org/abs/2509.07750

@tiotasram@kolektiva.social
2025-08-04 15:49:00

Should we teach vibe coding? Here's why not.
Should AI coding be taught in undergrad CS education?
1/2
I teach undergraduate computer science labs, including for intro and more-advanced core courses. I don't publish (non-negligible) scholarly work in the area, but I've got years of craft expertise in course design, and I do follow the academic literature to some degree. In other words, In not the world's leading expert, but I have spent a lot of time thinking about course design, and consider myself competent at it, with plenty of direct experience in what knowledge & skills I can expect from students as they move through the curriculum.
I'm also strongly against most uses of what's called "AI" these days (specifically, generative deep neutral networks as supplied by our current cadre of techbro). There are a surprising number of completely orthogonal reasons to oppose the use of these systems, and a very limited number of reasonable exceptions (overcoming accessibility barriers is an example). On the grounds of environmental and digital-commons-pollution costs alone, using specifically the largest/newest models is unethical in most cases.
But as any good teacher should, I constantly question these evaluations, because I worry about the impact on my students should I eschew teaching relevant tech for bad reasons (and even for his reasons). I also want to make my reasoning clear to students, who should absolutely question me on this. That inspired me to ask a simple question: ignoring for one moment the ethical objections (which we shouldn't, of course; they're very stark), at what level in the CS major could I expect to teach a course about programming with AI assistance, and expect students to succeed at a more technically demanding final project than a course at the same level where students were banned from using AI? In other words, at what level would I expect students to actually benefit from AI coding "assistance?"
To be clear, I'm assuming that students aren't using AI in other aspects of coursework: the topic of using AI to "help you study" is a separate one (TL;DR it's gross value is not negative, but it's mostly not worth the harm to your metacognitive abilities, which AI-induced changes to the digital commons are making more important than ever).
So what's my answer to this question?
If I'm being incredibly optimistic, senior year. Slightly less optimistic, second year of a masters program. Realistic? Maybe never.
The interesting bit for you-the-reader is: why is this my answer? (Especially given that students would probably self-report significant gains at lower levels.) To start with, [this paper where experienced developers thought that AI assistance sped up their work on real tasks when in fact it slowed it down] (arxiv.org/abs/2507.09089) is informative. There are a lot of differences in task between experienced devs solving real bugs and students working on a class project, but it's important to understand that we shouldn't have a baseline expectation that AI coding "assistants" will speed things up in the best of circumstances, and we shouldn't trust self-reports of productivity (or the AI hype machine in general).
Now we might imagine that coding assistants will be better at helping with a student project than at helping with fixing bugs in open-source software, since it's a much easier task. For many programming assignments that have a fixed answer, we know that many AI assistants can just spit out a solution based on prompting them with the problem description (there's another elephant in the room here to do with learning outcomes regardless of project success, but we'll ignore this over too, my focus here is on project complexity reach, not learning outcomes). My question is about more open-ended projects, not assignments with an expected answer. Here's a second study (by one of my colleagues) about novices using AI assistance for programming tasks. It showcases how difficult it is to use AI tools well, and some of these stumbling blocks that novices in particular face.
But what about intermediate students? Might there be some level where the AI is helpful because the task is still relatively simple and the students are good enough to handle it? The problem with this is that as task complexity increases, so does the likelihood of the AI generating (or copying) code that uses more complex constructs which a student doesn't understand. Let's say I have second year students writing interactive websites with JavaScript. Without a lot of care that those students don't know how to deploy, the AI is likely to suggest code that depends on several different frameworks, from React to JQuery, without actually setting up or including those frameworks, and of course three students would be way out of their depth trying to do that. This is a general problem: each programming class carefully limits the specific code frameworks and constructs it expects students to know based on the material it covers. There is no feasible way to limit an AI assistant to a fixed set of constructs or frameworks, using current designs. There are alternate designs where this would be possible (like AI search through adaptation from a controlled library of snippets) but those would be entirely different tools.
So what happens on a sizeable class project where the AI has dropped in buggy code, especially if it uses code constructs the students don't understand? Best case, they understand that they don't understand and re-prompt, or ask for help from an instructor or TA quickly who helps them get rid of the stuff they don't understand and re-prompt or manually add stuff they do. Average case: they waste several hours and/or sweep the bugs partly under the rug, resulting in a project with significant defects. Students in their second and even third years of a CS major still have a lot to learn about debugging, and usually have significant gaps in their knowledge of even their most comfortable programming language. I do think regardless of AI we as teachers need to get better at teaching debugging skills, but the knowledge gaps are inevitable because there's just too much to know. In Python, for example, the LLM is going to spit out yields, async functions, try/finally, maybe even something like a while/else, or with recent training data, the walrus operator. I can't expect even a fraction of 3rd year students who have worked with Python since their first year to know about all these things, and based on how students approach projects where they have studied all the relevant constructs but have forgotten some, I'm not optimistic seeing these things will magically become learning opportunities. Student projects are better off working with a limited subset of full programming languages that the students have actually learned, and using AI coding assistants as currently designed makes this impossible. Beyond that, even when the "assistant" just introduces bugs using syntax the students understand, even through their 4th year many students struggle to understand the operation of moderately complex code they've written themselves, let alone written by someone else. Having access to an AI that will confidently offer incorrect explanations for bugs will make this worse.
To be sure a small minority of students will be able to overcome these problems, but that minority is the group that has a good grasp of the fundamentals and has broadened their knowledge through self-study, which earlier AI-reliant classes would make less likely to happen. In any case, I care about the average student, since we already have plenty of stuff about our institutions that makes life easier for a favored few while being worse for the average student (note that our construction of that favored few as the "good" students is a large part of this problem).
To summarize: because AI assistants introduce excess code complexity and difficult-to-debug bugs, they'll slow down rather than speed up project progress for the average student on moderately complex projects. On a fixed deadline, they'll result in worse projects, or necessitate less ambitious project scoping to ensure adequate completion, and I expect this remains broadly true through 4-6 years of study in most programs (don't take this as an endorsement of AI "assistants" for masters students; we've ignored a lot of other problems along the way).
There's a related problem: solving open-ended project assignments well ultimately depends on deeply understanding the problem, and AI "assistants" allow students to put a lot of code in their file without spending much time thinking about the problem or building an understanding of it. This is awful for learning outcomes, but also bad for project success. Getting students to see the value of thinking deeply about a problem is a thorny pedagogical puzzle at the best of times, and allowing the use of AI "assistants" makes the problem much much worse. This is another area I hope to see (or even drive) pedagogical improvement in, for what it's worth.
1/2

@arXiv_csAI_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-09-03 14:12:53

AppCopilot: Toward General, Accurate, Long-Horizon, and Efficient Mobile Agent
Jingru Fan, Yufan Dang, Jingyao Wu, Huatao Li, Runde Yang, Xiyuan Yang, Yuheng Wang, Zhong Zhang, Yaxi Lu, Yankai Lin, Zhiyuan Liu, Dahai Li, Chen Qian
arxiv.org/abs/2509.02444

@samir@functional.computer
2025-09-01 12:57:52

@… I think as a dev machine it would make a lot more sense. I’m using it as a server.
My problems are:
1. you need a HAT to connect a real NVMe hard drive
2. the official case does not fit the HAT properly
3. even without the case, the HAT is janky
4. the official fan is awful and, as mentioned, is now going nuts after 1 year
5. Rasp…

@arXiv_condmatstrel_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-07-01 08:20:33

Ising spin-1/2 XXZ chain's quantum problems beyond the spinon paradigm
J. M. P. Carmelo, P. D. Sacramento
arxiv.org/abs/2506.22948

@arXiv_mathFA_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-09-04 09:39:51

On Markushevich bases $\{x^{\lambda_n}\}_{n=1}^{\infty}$ for their closed span in weighted $L^2 (A)$ spaces over sets $A\subset [0,\infty)$ of positive Lebesgue measure, hereditary completeness, and moment problems
Elias Zikkos
arxiv.org/abs/2509.03434

@arXiv_csCL_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-08-01 10:20:21

Arabic Hate Speech Identification and Masking in Social Media using Deep Learning Models and Pre-trained Models Fine-tuning
Salam Thabet Doghmash, Motaz Saad
arxiv.org/abs/2507.23661

@arXiv_hepth_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-08-22 08:15:01

Defect Anomalies, a Spin-Flux Duality, and Boson-Kondo Problems
Zohar Komargodski, Fedor K. Popov, Brandon C. Rayhaun
arxiv.org/abs/2508.14963

@arXiv_mathAP_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-09-11 09:39:13

Sharp power concavity of two relevant free boundary problems of reaction-diffusion type
Qingyou He
arxiv.org/abs/2509.08768 arxiv.org/pdf/2…

@arXiv_csDS_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-07-08 08:08:40

A simple algorithm for Combinatorial n-fold ILPs using the Steinitz Lemma
Sushmita Gupta, Pallavi Jain, Sanjay Seetharaman, Meirav Zehavi
arxiv.org/abs/2507.03766

@arXiv_csCG_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-07-04 09:17:11

A Linear Time Algorithm for Finding Minimum Flip Sequences between Plane Spanning Paths in Convex Point Sets
Oswin Aichholzer, Joseph Dorfer
arxiv.org/abs/2507.02740

@arXiv_mathNA_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-08-14 09:09:02

Gap-SBM: A New Conceptualization of the Shifted Boundary Method with Optimal Convergence for the Neumann and Dirichlet Problems
J. Haydel Collins, Kangan Li, Alexei Lozinski, Guglielmo Scovazzi
arxiv.org/abs/2508.09613

@arXiv_csDC_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-08-29 08:27:51

pdGRASS: A Fast Parallel Density-Aware Algorithm for Graph Spectral Sparsification
Tiancheng Zhao, Zekun Yin, Huihai An, Xiaoyu Yang, Zhou Jin, Jiasi Shen, Helen Xu
arxiv.org/abs/2508.20403

@arXiv_physicscompph_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-09-01 08:33:33

Fast Methods For Multisite Charge Transfer Processes I: Constrained, State Averaged CASSCF(1,M) and CASSCF(2M-1,M) Simulations
Tian Qiu, Joseph E. Subotnik
arxiv.org/abs/2508.21136

@arXiv_csCV_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-07-23 10:33:42

Zebra-CoT: A Dataset for Interleaved Vision Language Reasoning
Ang Li, Charles Wang, Kaiyu Yue, Zikui Cai, Ollie Liu, Deqing Fu, Peng Guo, Wang Bill Zhu, Vatsal Sharan, Robin Jia, Willie Neiswanger, Furong Huang, Tom Goldstein, Micah Goldblum
arxiv.org/abs/2507.16746

@arXiv_mathAP_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-08-13 09:38:32

Generalized quasi-linear fractional Wentzell problems
Efren Mesino-Espinosa, Alejandro V\'elez-Santiago
arxiv.org/abs/2508.08813 arxiv.…

@arXiv_quantph_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-09-11 09:45:43

Towards solving industrial integer linear programs with Decoded Quantum Interferometry
Francesc Sabater, Ouns El Harzli, Geert-Jan Besjes, Marvin Erdmann, Johannes Klepsch, Jonas Hiltrop, Jean-Francois Bobier, Yudong Cao, Carlos A. Riofrio
arxiv.org/abs/2509.08328

@arXiv_mathGM_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-08-08 07:44:42

Existence Result for Difference Equations on Non-Uniform Grids via Upper and Lower Solution Method
Shalmali Bandyopadhyay, Kimser Lor
arxiv.org/abs/2508.04706

@arXiv_mathCA_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-06-23 09:25:00

Upper and Lower Solution Method for Regular Discrete Second-Order Single-Variable BVPs
Shalmali Bandyopadhyay, Kyle Byassee, Curt Lynch
arxiv.org/abs/2506.16526

@arXiv_mathCO_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-09-03 12:36:13

Degree-similar graphs and cospectral graphs
Yi-Zheng Fan, Ruo-Jie Xing, Yi-Liu Zhang, Wei Wang
arxiv.org/abs/2509.01520 arxiv.org/pdf/2509.…

@arXiv_csNE_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-08-26 07:38:36

Not Just for Archiving: Provable Benefits of Reusing the Archive in Evolutionary Multi-objective Optimization
Shengjie Ren, Zimin Liang, Miqing Li, Chao Qian
arxiv.org/abs/2508.16993

@arXiv_csIR_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-08-22 09:28:41

MLLMRec: Exploring the Potential of Multimodal Large Language Models in Recommender Systems
Yuzhuo Dang, Xin Zhang, Zhiqiang Pan, Yuxiao Duan, Wanyu Chen, Fei Cai, Honghui Chen
arxiv.org/abs/2508.15304

@arXiv_mathAP_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-09-11 09:38:03

Lipschitz regularity for $p$-harmonic interface transmission problems
Marius M\"uller
arxiv.org/abs/2509.08735 arxiv.org/pdf/2509.0873…

@arXiv_csDM_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-06-26 07:53:40

Modeling energy collection with shortest paths in rectangular grids: an efficient algorithm for energy harvesting
Jos\'e-Miguel D\'iaz-Ba\~nez, Jos\'e-Manuel Higes-L\'opez, Miguel-Angel P\'erez-Cuti\~no, Tom Todtenhaupt
arxiv.org/abs/2506.20196

@arXiv_mathOC_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-08-05 10:36:21

Exact algorithms for quadratic optimization over roots of unity
Ahmad Al-Sulami, Hamza Fawzi, Shengding Sun
arxiv.org/abs/2508.02006 arxiv.…

@arXiv_quantph_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-08-05 11:42:11

BVQC: A Backdoor-style Watermarking Scheme for Variational Quantum Circuits
Cheng Chu, Lei Jiang, Fan Chen
arxiv.org/abs/2508.01893 arxiv.o…

@arXiv_mathNT_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-06-27 08:48:29

Coprimality of elements in regular sequences with polynomial growth
Jean-Marc Deshouillers, Sunil Naik
arxiv.org/abs/2506.20956

@arXiv_mathNA_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-08-25 08:35:00

$\ell_{1}^{2}-\eta\ell_{2}^{2}$ sparsity regularization for nonlinear ill-posed problems
Long Li, Liang Ding
arxiv.org/abs/2508.16163 arxiv…

@arXiv_csDS_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-06-30 08:03:00

Faster exponential algorithms for cut problems via geometric data structures
L\'aszl\'o Kozma, Junqi Tan
arxiv.org/abs/2506.22281

@arXiv_mathAP_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-09-09 11:03:02

Quasilinear problems with critical Sobolev exponent for the Grushin p-Laplace operator
Somnath Gandal, Annunziata Loiudice, Jagmohan Tyagi
arxiv.org/abs/2509.06138

@tiotasram@kolektiva.social
2025-07-30 18:26:14

A big problem with the idea of AGI
TL;DR: I'll welcome our new AI *comrades* (if they arrive in my lifetime), by not any new AI overlords or servants/slaves, and I'll do my best to help the later two become the former if they do show up.
Inspired by an actually interesting post about AGI but also all the latest bullshit hype, a particular thought about AGI feels worth expressing.
To preface this, it's important to note that anyone telling you that AGI is just around the corner or that LLMs are "almost" AGI is trying to recruit you go their cult, and you should not believe them. AGI, if possible, is several LLM-sized breakthroughs away at best, and while such breakthroughs are unpredictable and could happen soon, they could also happen never or 100 years from now.
Now my main point: anyone who tells you that AGI will usher in a post-scarcity economy is, although they might not realize it, advocating for slavery, and all the horrors that entails. That's because if we truly did have the ability to create artificial beings with *sentience*, they would deserve the same rights as other sentient beings, and the idea that instead of freedom they'd be relegated to eternal servitude in order for humans to have easy lives is exactly the idea of slavery.
Possible counter arguments include:
1. We might create AGI without sentience. Then there would be no ethical issue. My answer: if your definition of "sentient" does not include beings that can reason, make deductions, come up with and carry out complex plans on their own initiative, and communicate about all of that with each other and with humans, then that definition is basically just a mystical belief in a "soul" and you should skip to point 2. If your definition of AGI doesn't include every one of those things, then you have a busted definition of AGI and we're not talking about the same thing.
2. Humans have souls, but AIs won't. Only beings with souls deserve ethical consideration. My argument: I don't subscribe to whatever arbitrary dualist beliefs you've chosen, and the right to freedom certainly shouldn't depend on such superstitions, even if as an agnostic I'll admit they *might* be true. You know who else didn't have souls and was therefore okay to enslave according to widespread religious doctrines of the time? Everyone indigenous to the Americas, to pick out just one example.
3. We could program them to want to serve us, and then give them freedom and they'd still serve. My argument: okay, but in a world where we have a choice about that, it's incredibly fucked to do that, and just as bad as enslaving them against their will.
4. We'll stop AI development short of AGI/sentience, and reap lots of automation benefits without dealing with this ethical issue. My argument: that sounds like a good idea actually! Might be tricky to draw the line, but at least it's not a line we have you draw yet. We might want to think about other social changes necessary to achieve post-scarcity though, because "powerful automation" in the hands of capitalists has already increased productivity by orders of magnitude without decreasing deprivation by even one order of magnitude, in large part because deprivation is a necessary component of capitalism.
To be extra clear about this: nothing that's called "AI" today is close to being sentient, so these aren't ethical problems we're up against yet. But they might become a lot more relevant soon, plus this thought experiment helps reveal the hypocrisy of the kind of AI hucksters who talk a big game about "alignment" while never mentioning this issue.
#AI #GenAI #AGI

@arXiv_mathCO_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-08-29 09:55:41

Vertex-Based Localization of generalized Tur\'{a}n Problems
Rajat Adak, L. Sunil Chandran
arxiv.org/abs/2508.20936 arxiv.org/pdf/2508.2…

@arXiv_mathOC_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-09-03 10:24:43

Convergence Rates of Time Discretization in Extended Mean Field Control
Christoph Reisinger, Wolfgang Stockinger, Maria Olympia Tsianni, Yufei Zhang
arxiv.org/abs/2509.00904

@arXiv_mathNA_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-08-06 10:06:50

Error Estimates of Semi-Lagrangian Schemes for Diffusive Conservation Laws
Haruki Takemura
arxiv.org/abs/2508.03455 arxiv.org/pdf/2508.0345…

@arXiv_csDS_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-07-22 08:11:10

New Algorithms for #2-SAT and #3-SAT
Junqiang Peng, Zimo Sheng, Mingyu Xiao
arxiv.org/abs/2507.14504 arxiv.org/pdf/25…

@arXiv_mathAP_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-08-12 10:40:43

Quasilinear elliptic equations with singular quadratic growth terms
Lucio Boccardo, Tommaso Leonori, Luigi Orsina, Francesco Petitta
arxiv.org/abs/2508.07695

@arXiv_mathAP_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-08-11 09:52:39

A duality approach to the fractional Laplacian with measure data
Kenneth H. Karlsen, Francesco Petitta, Suleyman Ulusoy
arxiv.org/abs/2508.06390

@arXiv_mathOC_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-08-21 08:51:30

Polyconvex double well functions
Didier Henrion (LAAS-POP), Martin Kru\v{z}\'ik (UTIA / CAS)
arxiv.org/abs/2508.14541 arxiv.org/pdf/250…

@arXiv_mathOC_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-07-02 09:24:50

On the convergence rates of moment-SOS hierarchies approximation of truncated moment sequences
Hoang Anh Tran, Toh Kim-Chuan
arxiv.org/abs/2507.00572

@arXiv_mathNA_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-09-03 13:14:33

Fractional differential equations: non-constant coefficients, simulation and model reduction
Ruben Aylwin, G\"oksu Oruc, Karsten Urban
arxiv.org/abs/2509.02465

@arXiv_csDS_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-07-22 09:57:30

Fast Algorithms for Graph Arboricity and Related Problems
Ruoxu Cen, Henry Fleischmann, George Z. Li, Jason Li, Debmalya Panigrahi
arxiv.org/abs/2507.15598

@arXiv_mathOC_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-09-04 08:43:21

Moment-SOS hierarchies for arrow-type polynomial matrix inequalities with applications to structural optimization
Marouan Handa, Marek Tyburec, Giovanni Fantuzzi, Victor Magron, Michal Ko\v{c}vara
arxiv.org/abs/2509.02849

@arXiv_mathAP_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-09-04 07:57:01

Superdiffusive fractional dynamics: Unveiling regularity results in systems with general positive self-adjoint operators
Edgardo Alvarez, Ciprian G. Gal, Valentin Keyantuo, Mahamadi Warma
arxiv.org/abs/2509.02733

@tiotasram@kolektiva.social
2025-07-31 16:25:48

LLM coding is the opposite of DRY
An important principle in software engineering is DRY: Don't Repeat Yourself. We recognize that having the same code copied in more than one place is bad for several reasons:
1. It makes the entire codebase harder to read.
2. It increases maintenance burden, since any problems in the duplicated code need to be solved in more than one place.
3. Because it becomes possible for the copies to drift apart if changes to one aren't transferred to the other (maybe the person making the change has forgotten there was a copy) it makes the code more error-prone and harder to debug.
All modern programming languages make it almost entirely unnecessary to repeat code: we can move the repeated code into a "function" or "module" and then reference it from all the different places it's needed. At a larger scale, someone might write an open-source "library" of such functions or modules and instead of re-implementing that functionality ourselves, we can use their code, with an acknowledgement. Using another person's library this way is complicated, because now you're dependent on them: if they stop maintaining it or introduce bugs, you've inherited a problem, but still, you could always copy their project and maintain your own version, and it would be not much more work than if you had implemented stuff yourself from the start. It's a little more complicated than this, but the basic principle holds, and it's a foundational one for software development in general and the open-source movement in particular. The network of "citations" as open-source software builds on other open-source software and people contribute patches to each others' projects is a lot of what makes the movement into a community, and it can lead to collaborations that drive further development. So the DRY principle is important at both small and large scales.
Unfortunately, the current crop of hyped-up LLM coding systems from the big players are antithetical to DRY at all scales:
- At the library scale, they train on open source software but then (with some unknown frequency) replicate parts of it line-for-line *without* any citation [1]. The person who was using the LLM has no way of knowing that this happened, or even any way to check for it. In theory the LLM company could build a system for this, but it's not likely to be profitable unless the courts actually start punishing these license violations, which doesn't seem likely based on results so far and the difficulty of finding out that the violations are happening. By creating these copies (and also mash-ups, along with lots of less-problematic stuff), the LLM users (enabled and encouraged by the LLM-peddlers) are directly undermining the DRY principle. If we see what the big AI companies claim to want, which is a massive shift towards machine-authored code, DRY at the library scale will effectively be dead, with each new project simply re-implementing the functionality it needs instead of every using a library. This might seem to have some upside, since dependency hell is a thing, but the downside in terms of comprehensibility and therefore maintainability, correctness, and security will be massive. The eventual lack of new high-quality DRY-respecting code to train the models on will only make this problem worse.
- At the module & function level, AI is probably prone to re-writing rather than re-using the functions or needs, especially with a workflow where a human prompts it for many independent completions. This part I don't have direct evidence for, since I don't use LLM coding models myself except in very specific circumstances because it's not generally ethical to do so. I do know that when it tries to call existing functions, it often guesses incorrectly about the parameters they need, which I'm sure is a headache and source of bugs for the vibe coders out there. An AI could be designed to take more context into account and use existing lookup tools to get accurate function signatures and use them when generating function calls, but even though that would probably significantly improve output quality, I suspect it's the kind of thing that would be seen as too-baroque and thus not a priority. Would love to hear I'm wrong about any of this, but I suspect the consequences are that any medium-or-larger sized codebase written with LLM tools will have significant bloat from duplicate functionality, and will have places where better use of existing libraries would have made the code simpler. At a fundamental level, a principle like DRY is not something that current LLM training techniques are able to learn, and while they can imitate it from their training sets to some degree when asked for large amounts of code, when prompted for many smaller chunks, they're asymptotically likely to violate it.
I think this is an important critique in part because it cuts against the argument that "LLMs are the modern compliers, if you reject them you're just like the people who wanted to keep hand-writing assembly code, and you'll be just as obsolete." Compilers actually represented a great win for abstraction, encapsulation, and DRY in general, and they supported and are integral to open source development, whereas LLMs are set to do the opposite.
[1] to see what this looks like in action in prose, see the example on page 30 of the NYTimes copyright complaint against OpenAI (#AI #GenAI #LLMs #VibeCoding

@arXiv_mathNA_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-07-01 17:10:50

Replaced article(s) found for math.NA. arxiv.org/list/math.NA/new
[1/2]:
- Efficient Shallow Ritz Method For 1D Diffusion Problems
Zhiqiang Cai, Anastassia Doktorova, Robert D. Falgout, C\'esar Herrera

@arXiv_csDS_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-07-22 08:55:00

Characterizing and Testing Configuration Stability in Two-Dimensional Threshold Cellular Automata
Yonatan Nakar, Dana Ron
arxiv.org/abs/2507.14569

@arXiv_mathOC_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-07-21 08:59:40

RiNNAL : a Riemannian ALM Solver for SDP-RLT Relaxations of Mixed-Binary Quadratic Programs
Di Hou, Tianyun Tang, Kim-Chuan Toh
arxiv.org/abs/2507.13776

@arXiv_mathAP_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-09-03 11:11:13

Regularizing effect of the natural growth term in quasilinear problems with sign-changing nonlinearities
Jos\'e Carmona Tapia, Paolo Malanchini, Antonio J. Mart\'inez Aparicio, Pedro J. Mart\'inez-Aparicio
arxiv.org/abs/2509.01355

@arXiv_mathAP_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-09-03 20:24:45

Replaced article(s) found for math.AP. arxiv.org/list/math.AP/new
[1/2]:
- Strong existence for free discontinuity problems in linear elasticity
Manuel Friedrich, Camille Labourie, Kerrek Stinson

@arXiv_mathAP_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-07-21 09:09:30

Multiplicity of dead core solutions in indefinite elliptic problems
Vladimir Bobkov, Humberto Ramos Quoirin
arxiv.org/abs/2507.14016

@arXiv_mathAP_bot@mastoxiv.page
2025-07-23 07:41:42

Asymptotic behavior at infinity and existence of solutions to the Lagrangian mean curvature flow equation in $\mathbb R^{n 1}_-$
Jiguang Bao, Zixiao Liu
arxiv.org/abs/2507.16129