Hi, I'm an author on the paper. It was definitely a human-AI collaboration, but it is also true that the final simplified formula, Eq. 39 in the paper (which is what we had been seeking, without success), was conjectured and proved by GPT. So it derived a new result in theoretical physics. I'm genuinely puzzled by your complaint.
That paper from the 80s (which is cited in the new one) is about "MHV amplitudes" with two negative-helicity gluons, so "double-minus amplitudes". The main significance of this new paper is to point out that "single-minus amplitudes" which had previously been thought to vanish are actually nontrivial. Moreover, GPT-5.2 Pro computed a simple formula for the single-minus amplitudes that is the analogue of the Parke-Taylor formula for the double-minus "MHV" amplitudes.
Hi I am an author of the paper. We believed that a simple formula should exist but had not been able to find it despite significant effort. It was a collaborative effort but GPT definitely solved the problem for us.
Oh that's really cool, I am not versed in physics by any means, can you explain how you believed there to be a simple formula but were unable to find it? What would lead you to believe that instead of just accepting it at face value?
There are closely related "MHV amplitudes" which naively obey a really complicated formula, but for which there famously also exists a much simpler "Parke-Taylor formula". Alfredo had derived a complicated expression for these new "single-minus amplitudes" and we were hoping we could find an analogue of the simpler "Parke-Taylor formula" for them.
I am very sympathetic to your point of view, but let me offer another perspective. First off, you can already vibe-write slop papers with AI, even in LaTeX format--tools like Prism are not needed for that. On the other hand, it can really help researchers improve the quality of their papers. I'm someone who collaborates with many students and postdocs. My time is limited and I spend a lot of it on LaTeX drudgery that can and should be automated away, so I'm excited for Prism to save time on writing, proofreading, making TikZ diagrams, grabbing references, etc.
This is what I see, you need more of an active, accomplished helper at the keyboard.
If I can't have that, the next best thing is a helper while I'm at the keyboard my damn self.
>Why LaTeX is the bottleneck: scientists spend hours aligning diagrams, formatting equations, and managing references—time that should go to actual science, not typesetting
This is supposed to be only a temporary situation until people recover from the cutbacks of the 1970's, and a more comprehensive number of scientists once again have their own secretary.
Looks like the engineers at Crixet were tired of waiting.
Focusing in on "grabbing references", it's as easy as drag-and-drop if you use Zotero. It can copy/paste references in BibTeX format. You can even customize it through the BetterBibTeX extension.
If you're not a Zotero user, I can't recommend it enough.
I have a terrible memory for details, I'll admit an LLM I can just tell "Find that paper by X's group on Method That Does This And That" and finds me the paper is enticing. I say this because I abandoned Zotero once the list of refs became large enough that I could never find anything quickly.
Not currently. As I mentioned elsewhere, the rotating black hole version that we implemented requires GPU code, and porting that to Android is nontrivial---though we'd love it if someone took our open-source code and ported it!
In the meantime, check out this code developed by Dominic Chang (grad student at Harvard) that implements lensing by a non-rotating (Schwarzschild) black hole in your browser: https://dominic-chang.com/bhi-filter/
That would be cool, but then you wouldn't be seeing the world around you anymore. In other words, at that point it becomes a GRMHD simulation, and there is no point in using cameras since the user's environment is obscured, no? Or did you have something else in mind?
I haven't looked into the equations but I expect the effect of varying the electric charge would be similar to (but less dramatic than) changing the spin of the black hole, which as you can see in our app is not that big of a change.
The rotating black hole version that we implemented requires GPU code, and porting that to Android is nontrivial---though we'd love it if someone took our open-source code and ported it!
In the meantime, check out this code developed by Dominic Chang (grad student at Harvard) that implements lensing by a non-rotating (Schwarzschild) black hole in your browser:
https://dominic-chang.com/bhi-filter/
reply