Caltech undergraduate students restructured a mathematics contest after the math community objected to its backing by AI firms such as OpenAI and Anthropic. Originally dubbed “Mathathon,” the plan called for a two-day tournament in which dozens of teams would tackle challenging mathematical problems using artificial intelligence, with the aim of supporting broad collaboration between researchers and AI developers.
Critics quickly pushed back against the Mathathon, opposing both the use of AI to address unsolved mathematical challenges and the participation of AI firms whose methodologies and products they had previously criticized. A public letter signed by academics urged the student planners to halt the competition, claiming it would promote what they called ‘slop mathematics’ and serve as little more than a promotional stunt for the sponsoring companies.
Redesigning the Event
Instead of abandoning the event, the Caltech student organizers chose to address the concerns directly. ‘We decided we wanted to create something that brings the math community together, not tears it apart,’ explained Brian Zhao, a junior in applied mathematics at Caltech and one of the Mathathon’s organizers.
The Mathathon controversy highlighted deep divisions within the mathematics field over how AI should influence its future.
“To put it bluntly, AI companies are engaging in research misconduct,” wrote the authors of the open letter, which gained the signatures of 2,038 academics. The letter criticized the involvement of AI companies in the event, arguing that it would undermine the integrity of mathematical research.
Read Also: California teachers push for ballot measure to extend education tax
Debate Over AI’s Role in Mathematics
The debate surrounding AI in mathematics is long overdue, according to Dimitri Shlyakhtenko, a UCLA mathematics professor who has observed the Mathathon’s development. Though AI appears to be transforming the field by solving century-old problems, the reality is far more complicated than it seems.
For mathematicians, the value lies not just in reaching a solution but in the process of discovery itself, Shlyakhtenko noted. AI, however, often bypasses that journey, offering ‘a kind of direct shortcut.’ Some worry that relying on AI could deprive younger mathematicians of essential training opportunities.
The updated Mathathon competition will allow participants to use AI, but highly encourage them to use open-source tools that can be modified by the public instead of proprietary models run by private entities like OpenAI. Zhao said he and his fellow organizers are determined to move forward with hosting the event, hoping it will allow students to discover ways to use the technology responsibly and build a bridge between AI developers and the math community.
Following the backlash, OpenAI withdrew its sponsorship, with research lead Dan Roberts acknowledging that ‘the rapid progress of AI in mathematics is disruptive.’ Anthropic declined to comment. The organizers have since learned to balance ambition with caution, recognizing the importance of thoughtful dialogue over attention-grabbing claims.
As the Mathathon drama unfolded, Zhao said he has learned two important lessons: Be ambitious and be humble. Maintaining the lofty goal of the event has helped the team persist in the face of challenges, and the conversations with mathematicians have also taught him to present himself honestly as an undergrad who is curious about AI. The event is set to take place later this year, with the exact date and details still to be announced, and the $2 million in AI credits initially offered by the sponsors will not be part of the updated competition.
