0 reactions
Assessing AI agents at autonomous theoretical physics problem solving
What are your thoughts on this recent preprint, 2610.16733 https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.16733 ? They seemed to show how Frontier AI agents tackled unpublished research-level theoretical physics problems, and suggest such problems might no longer be suitable as first projects for PhD students.
I'm especially curious how this will overall affect prospective grad students and early-career researchers in theoretical physics.
---
Also, recalling Dr. Schwartz (u/VibePhysics) saying in his Anthropic post Vibe Physics https://www.anthropic.com/research/vibe-physics :
> It is worth it, however, to consider the role of education going forward. In the deep future (~10 years), when AI is truly smarter than all of us and capable of outperforming us in every domain, what will be the role of higher education? I think some things will persist—those things that are essentially human. I can easily imagine theoretical physics becoming like music theory or French literature: an academic discipline appealing to people who just enjoy thinking through a certain lens. It's a bit ironic that the last 30 years have seen the growth of STEM fields, displacing the humanities, and in the end it may be the humanities are all that survive.
Do you agree with him on this specific thoughts? And what concerns or hopes do you have about where our fields in theoretical physics are heading?
#science
What are your thoughts on this recent preprint, 2610.16733 https://arxiv.org/abs/2610.16733 ? They seemed to show how Frontier AI agents tackled unpublished research-level theoretical physics problems, and suggest such problems might no longer be suitable as first projects for PhD students.
I'm especially curious how this will overall affect prospective grad students and early-career researchers in theoretical physics.
---
Also, recalling Dr. Schwartz (u/VibePhysics) saying in his Anthropic post Vibe Physics https://www.anthropic.com/research/vibe-physics :
> It is worth it, however, to consider the role of education going forward. In the deep future (~10 years), when AI is truly smarter than all of us and capable of outperforming us in every domain, what will be the role of higher education? I think some things will persist—those things that are essentially human. I can easily imagine theoretical physics becoming like music theory or French literature: an academic discipline appealing to people who just enjoy thinking through a certain lens. It's a bit ironic that the last 30 years have seen the growth of STEM fields, displacing the humanities, and in the end it may be the humanities are all that survive.
Do you agree with him on this specific thoughts? And what concerns or hopes do you have about where our fields in theoretical physics are heading?
#science
0 reactions
0 reactions
Does anyone actually like their grad courses?
I am a PhD candidate at the University of New Mexico. A frequent topic of conversation among grad students here is just how bad the courses are, especially the non-elective courses. I was wondering if this is a universal experience or just UNM?
To be clear: by bad I don't mean they're really hard. Some non-elective classes are really hard; some are embarrassingly easy. What I am referring to is the fact that, in general, it is accepted that lectures will be poorly thought out and poorly delivered with many students seeing classes as a hurdle to overcome before you get to do research rather than something that prepares you to be a research scientist. I and others have found that usually students are best served just skipping lecture and learning the material on their own. As an example, I once skipped two months of lecture and just read a textbook and my grades and understanding of the material improved. The faculty seem vaguely aware of how rough the classes are, but don't really seem to care. This reaction from faculty makes me wonder just how common this is at other universities.
I am genuinely curious what other people's experiences are. I've been done with classes for a few semesters now, so this is not just a rant about a bad exam, and my grades in grad school have been very good, so it's not me trying to make excuses. Just a general question about the state of grad programs in the US or internationally.
#science
source
I am a PhD candidate at the University of New Mexico. A frequent topic of conversation among grad students here is just how bad the courses are, especially the non-elective courses. I was wondering if this is a universal experience or just UNM?
To be clear: by bad I don't mean they're really hard. Some non-elective classes are really hard; some are embarrassingly easy. What I am referring to is the fact that, in general, it is accepted that lectures will be poorly thought out and poorly delivered with many students seeing classes as a hurdle to overcome before you get to do research rather than something that prepares you to be a research scientist. I and others have found that usually students are best served just skipping lecture and learning the material on their own. As an example, I once skipped two months of lecture and just read a textbook and my grades and understanding of the material improved. The faculty seem vaguely aware of how rough the classes are, but don't really seem to care. This reaction from faculty makes me wonder just how common this is at other universities.
I am genuinely curious what other people's experiences are. I've been done with classes for a few semesters now, so this is not just a rant about a bad exam, and my grades in grad school have been very good, so it's not me trying to make excuses. Just a general question about the state of grad programs in the US or internationally.
#science
source