纽约大学教授 Buckmaster 指控 OpenAI 利用其先前研究抢先解开悬赏百万美元的纳维-斯托克斯存在性与光滑性问题，尽管 OpenAI 调查后宣称未受其提示词或数据影响，但未充分注明人类学者贡献的举动仍引发学术界震动；然而因科技巨头垄断且 AI 效率极高，连 Buckmaster 本人及其他数学家都坦言无法完全停止使用这些工具。

德国数学家 Andreas Thom 也遭遇了类似情况，其耗费二十年钻研的几何群论技术在未获充分引注的情况下被 OpenAI 模型引用，使学者们深感传统同行评审与贡献溯源机制正被彻底瓦解；面对黑箱演算法，数学界不仅难以理解 AI 推导证明的具体步骤，也对人类学者在兆元科技企业主导竞赛下的角色定位与研究价值产生了深刻的焦虑。

针对 AI 企业与数学界目标严重脱节的现况，已有二十五位费尔兹奖得主及数千名学者签署倡议以寻求监管或减速，但考量到效率优势，完全抵制可能导致学者被边缘化；Buckmaster 与其他教授因此呼吁 AI 实验室与学界应建立发布成果的规范以保护青年研究者，并在厘清引用归属与合作界线的前提下寻求缓和对立。

NYU professor Buckmaster accused OpenAI of using his research to beat him to solving the million-dollar Navier-Stokes existence and smoothness problem, and while OpenAI claimed after an investigation that his prompts had no influence, releasing solutions without fully crediting foundational human work sparked major backlash; nevertheless, due to big tech monopolies and sheer utility, Buckmaster and fellow mathematicians find it impossible to quit using these tools.

German mathematician Andreas Thom faced a similar issue when OpenAI models utilized his decades-long work in geometric group theory without proper initial attribution, highlighting how AI disrupts traditional academic credit and tracing mechanisms; with models functioning as black boxes, mathematicians struggle to comprehend AI-derived proofs, triggering existential questions regarding the role and purpose of human researchers alongside trillion-dollar corporations.

In response to misalignments between tech firms and the mathematical community, over twenty-five Fields Medalists and thousands of scholars have signed petitions seeking oversight, yet outright boycotts risk leaving researchers isolated due to massive efficiency gains; Buckmaster and his peers are calling for clear release guidelines and proper attribution to protect the next generation of mathematicians while seeking a detente with AI labs.