Conference

We present AlphaGeometry2, a significantly improved version of AlphaGeometry introduced in Trinh et al. (2024), which has now surpassed an average gold medalist in solving Olympiad geometry problems. To achieve this, we first extend the original AlphaGeometry language to tackle harder problems involving movements of objects, and problems containing linear equations of angles, ratios, and distances. This, together with support for non-constructive problems, has markedly improved the coverage rate of the AlphaGeometry language on International Math Olympiads (IMO) 2000-2024 geometry problems from 66% to 88%. The search process of AlphaGeometry2 has also been greatly improved through the use of Gemini architecture for better language modeling, and a novel knowledge-sharing mechanism that enables effective communication between search trees. Together with further enhancements to the symbolic engine and synthetic data generation, we have significantly boosted the overall solving rate of AlphaGeometry2 to 84% for all geometry problems over the last 25 years, compared to 54% previously. AlphaGeometry2 was also part of the system that achieved silver-medal standard at IMO 2024 this https URL. Last but not least, we report progress towards using AlphaGeometry2 as a part of a fully automated system that reliably solves geometry problems directly from natural language input.

Scientific research is facing mounting challenges: overwhelmed reviewers, fragmented expertise, an outdated and inefficient system for allocating resources, and dissemination tools that no longer match the complexity and scale of modern scientific output. In this talk, I speak both as a researcher and as the founder of a successful startup to explore what a more coherent, future-ready scientific ecosystem could look like. Drawing on real prototypes and emerging tools, I’ll outline how we might reshape the way we publish, collaborate, and share not just to fix what’s broken, but to unlock what science could become tomorrow.

In the past two years, the LLM has made significant progress in math and reasoning, but it has not been applied widely in scientific research tasks. In this talk I will give a brief introduction to our on-going efforts on building the first AI scientist platform, where all researchers in different fields can contribute to teaching the AI scientists via contributing benchmarks and contributing specialized tools. We believe that by providing AI with the real-time updates of benchmarks and research tools, we are starting to enter an era with innovation driven by new types of human-AI collaboration.

This talk explores how artificial intelligence could transform theoretical physics over the next 25 years by addressing the crucial challenge of navigating an increasingly complex scientific literature landscape. We introduce Litmaps, a platform leveraging AI and visualization techniques to accelerate literature discovery and insights. We illustrate Litmaps' current capabilities in rapidly identifying relevant connections and advancing theoretical research. We also outline critical engineering challenges, including open access to historical literature, data standardization, and managing uncertainty in AI models. Finally, we highlight the importance of collaboration among physicists, AI researchers, engineers, and entrepreneurs, to realise the AI-enhanced future of theoretical physics research.

From the start of AI, mathematical theorem proving has been an important challenge and technique. We sketch the topics of Automated and Interactive Theorem Proving and present the checking of naturally readable mathematical texts in the Naproche proof system. This involves translations between informal, semi-formal and formal mathematical languages and shows great potential for the use of new AI techniques.

What would effective and usable tools for searching text and graphics in research papers look like? In this talk we sketch a partial answer to this question, with reference to recent work in the Document and Pattern Recognition Lab at RIT. Two multimodal paper search prototypes, one for math (MathDeck) and one for chemistry (ReactionMiner search) will be used for illustration. A simple framework based on 'jars' of available information sources can organize and relate the actions performed by people and automated systems when retrieving, analyzing, and synthesizing sources. We will organize our answer sketch around this framework, and share open questions and research opportunities related to enhancing multi-modal search tools for expert and non-expert users. Note: ReactionMiner was developed in collaboration with NCSA and the Han lab at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. MathDeck demo: [https://people.rit.edu/ma5339/mathdeck_landing](https://people.rit.edu/ma5339/mathdeck_landing) ReactionMiner search demo: [https://reactionminer.platform.moleculemaker.org/home](https://reactionminer.platform.moleculemaker.org/home) Biography: Richard Zanibbi is a Professor of Computer Science at the Rochester Institute of Technology (RIT, USA) where he directs the Document and Pattern Recognition Lab (dprl@RIT). His research focuses upon the recognition and retrieval of graphical notations, particularly for mathematics and chemistry. He is also a member of the Molecule Maker Lab Institute (MMLI), one of the first NSF AI Centers. He received his PhD from Queen's University (Canada), and was an NSERC Postdoctoral Fellow at the Centre for Pattern Recognition and Machine Learning (CENPARMI) at Concordia University before joining RIT.

This short talk will outline some of LaTeXML's uses as infrastructure, as well as its enabling effect for search, AI, assistive technologies and the mobile web. We have been on a journey towards scholarly articles with web-native mathematics since the dawn of the internet. The physics Open Science movement has led the way along with LaTeX, its authoring framework of choice. NIST's LaTeXML is a conversion tool that in the last twenty years has increasingly bridged that gap.

The rise of AI, in particular recent LLM based tools, has had an immediate impact on the production of physics, in ways both good and bad. I discuss some of the impact seen on arXiv in particular, what the status quo and prospects are, and speculate on the longer term impact.