Tao: Math must value progress more holistically
Original: “Math 2.0” will need to value mathematical progress more holistically
Why This Matters
How math credits contributions shapes who participates and what gets attempted.
Fields Medalist Terence Tao argues that 'Math 2.0' must move beyond the 'Math 1.0' premium on being first to solve a problem, calling for broader recognition of mathematical contributions.
In a post on Mathstodon, Fields Medalist Terence Tao sketched a distinction between what he calls 'Math 1.0' and 'Math 2.0.' Under the old model, he argues, mathematics placed a heavy premium on priority — being the first to prove a result. Tao suggests this incentive structure is increasingly misaligned with how mathematical progress actually happens, especially as collaborative, computational, and AI-assisted tools reshape the field. 'Math 2.0,' in his framing, would require valuing contributions more holistically: recognizing partial results, formalization work, exposition, and collaborative efforts alongside solo breakthroughs. The post is brief but pointed, coming from one of the most prominent voices in contemporary mathematics. Tao has previously engaged publicly with AI-assisted proof verification and large-scale collaborative projects like Polymath, so the framing reflects longstanding concerns about how the profession incentivizes and credits work.