I think it's straightforward to value the result according to its impact and the author contribution according to the effort invested. The latter is neither zero nor outstanding. And the most expensive ChatGPT is same scale as Mathematica license.

Mark M. Wilde@markwilde.bsky.social · yesterday

it seems that the QI community has already decided on the new rules: 1) buy the most expensive model of ChatGPT 2) feed it your favorite open research question / conjecture 3) have it find the solution for you and possibly even write the paper 4) post the result to the arXiv with your name on it

Anthropic: other labs and open models can't be trusted, we're the ones that care about AI safety. Also Anthropic: forgets to restrict internet access in a model security evaluation.

I think the distinction is useful to keep though, and therefore I propose to introduce "tradcoding". Look, I tradcoded an app!

cee@cee.wtf · 7d ago

I think it’s time to just call vibecoding “coding”

We're at a strange, specific moment. Takes range from "publications are dead by fall" to "I tried LLMs in November, they were bad." If you have an LLM-assisted paper, take full responsibility as usual. Do everything: arXiv, GitHub, website, and integrate with databases if appropriate.

Now I made a physics demo of x-ray crystallography. The reciprocal space and how X-ray works took me a while to understand, and I think this captures the idea well. antonakhmerov.org/misc/xray.html

I wanted to like QED's new 1% preprint ranking. I really did. But the more I looked at the data, the more uncomfortable it made me. Here is my full peer review. open.substack.com/pub/blekhman...

My Peer Review of The 1%

I wanted to like QED's new 1% ranking. I don't.

open.substack.com

I think when ppl hear LLMs are good at code some think “whew! I always knew they should be restricted to narrowly technical uses (maybe protein folding?)“ but the thing that makes agentic application different imo is not the code—but the way it leverages context & augments human memory and patience

Another interactive demo showing the propagation of a wave packet in a tight-binding dispersion relation: antonakhmerov.org/misc/wave_pa...

Pretty sure this is what needs to happen in NL. Open weight models aren't competitive at high end of complexity, but they should be quite enough for education.

Ted Underwood@tedunderwood.com · 2mo ago

So, naive question about these campuses that pay OpenAI $13mil/yr. Why don’t they pour that money into a cluster running the strongest available open-weight model, with API and interactive options. And if the answer is “overhead,” why aren’t we collaborating?

I made an interactive explainer of carbon nanotube dispersion relations for my class today: antonakhmerov.org/files/carbon..., and I find it amazing and very useful. Naturally it is LLM-made. Making the equivalent by hand requires expertise and time investment only available to extremely few.

Some time in the future a visible and published theoretical condensed matter paper will be discovered to be wrong due to being an AI hallucination. I give it about a year.

No. Because the risks to whistleblowers aren't due to technological limitations.

Quantum Internet Alliance (QIA)@eu-qia.bsky.social · 4mo ago

Whistleblowing is vital, but rarely risk-free ⚠️ Could the #quantuminternet change that? Join this webinar with Frederik Hahn from Technische Universität Berlin tto explore quantum-enabled anonymity, network architectures & real-world potential. 🔗 quantuminternetalliance.org/event/quantu...

Curiously, working with other people has the same failure modes.

Dare Obasanjo@carnage4life.bsky.social · 3mo ago

Getting good at using LLMs means learning to work with tools that makes things up 10%-50% of the time. Many people struggle because they either: 1. Get frustrated by a non-deterministic tool they can’t trust. 2. Blindly trust it because “Claude/ChatGPT said so.” Both are common failure modes.

Found in the access.log Mozilla/5.0 (compatible; Thinkbot/0.5.8; +In_the_test_phase,_if_the_Thinkbot_brings_you_trouble,_please_block_its_IP_address._Thank_you.) Very polite bots these days. Some of them anyway.

Made a simple app for quick quizzes that doesn't have annoying registration or limits and supports latex. ownquiz.quantumtinkerer.tudelft.nl

APS March meeting next?

Dulwich Quantum Computing@dulwichquantum.bsky.social · 5mo ago

BREAKING: For the first time in 35 years the Ig Nobel ceremony will move to Europe. "There are no immediate plans to return the ceremony to the US." www.theguardian.com/science/2026... Food for thought for conference steering committees.

Agents (claude/codex/...) generate a *TON* of code. Reviewing it is a pain, so I made a tool to help. It generates a local preview of changes with agent explanations. You make review comments and copypaste them in one batch to the agent. Here it is: github.com/akhmerov/pre...

I'm ready for the future.

I went with "Generated-by: <model>" Seems OK.

Anton Akhmerov@antonakhmerov.org · 6mo ago

What git trailer to use to indicate AI-generated commits? Github uses "Co-authored-by", but I don't find this option appealing.

What git trailer to use to indicate AI-generated commits? Github uses "Co-authored-by", but I don't find this option appealing.

Every paper should be announced like this! 🤘

Anton Akhmerov@antonakhmerov.org · 6mo ago

Here's a power metal summary of scipost.org/10.21468/Sci.... It is fairly comprehensive and accurate. The text is generated by codex, the graphic by chatGPT, and the music by ACE-step. The research is of me and my coauthors :) I am honestly impressed by ACE-step.

Here's a power metal summary of scipost.org/10.21468/Sci.... It is fairly comprehensive and accurate. The text is generated by codex, the graphic by chatGPT, and the music by ACE-step. The research is of me and my coauthors :) I am honestly impressed by ACE-step.

My cursed fact of the day: Boltzmann distribution is the harmonic mean of Fermi-Dirac and Bose-Einstein distributions.

The white flag of surrendering.

OpenAI introduced a collaboration tool for science openai.com/index/introd.... It's probably decent, but I find it funny that "Science" apparently means "collaborative LaTeX editing"—that's the front and center of the new service.

Introducing Prism

Accelerating science writing and collaboration with AI.

openai.com

Didn't try reproducibility yet, but chatGPT 5.2 thinking can reasonably identify low quality papers in my field these days.

Ethan Mollick@emollick.bsky.social · 6mo ago

GPT-5.2 Pro is good enough to check reproducibility & robustness of academic papers across many fields (given the data, can you get the same results? are the statistics brittle?). I wouldn't trust it to automate decisions, but to flag them. It can't do an independent replication with new data, yet.

The correct solution is of course to have the mayors write "grant applications" that would give them tokens allowing to hire polecats. And then once the "funding agency" approves the grant, they'd need to write a report that is used in further evaluations. Simple.

thebes@vgel.me · 7mo ago

posted about a problem i'm having on the other site if anyone has any ideas

I expect that in 5 years, the publication model of theoretical condensed matter physics papers will either collapse or dramatically transform. This is because the effort of LLM-ing a paper that passes reasonable standards of many journals will become comparable to the effort of human review.

My personal no-go property of a platform is the login wall: I don't want to demand a platform account from my potential readers. Twitter had many last drops for different people, but the login wall a couple of years ago was mine. I've been avoiding LinkedIn for the same reason.

Okie dokie, in arxiv.org/abs/2601.00784 we invented a format for the AI disclosure statement.

Anton Akhmerov@antonakhmerov.org · 8mo ago

I am by now convinced that disclosing genAI usage should become a norm in academia and education. I was initially skeptical—it's just another tool—but I am now convinced that the extra transparency is helpful. After all, I am all for sharing code, what's different here?