Archive for the Artificial Intelligence Category

The Next Semester

Posted in Artificial Intelligence, Education, mathematics, Maynooth with tags , , , , , , , on January 26, 2026 by telescoper

There’s just a week to go before the next Semester at Maynooth University so I’ve been looking at my calendar for the weeks ahead. Actually, I won’t start teaching again until Tuesday 3rd February, because Monday 2nd February is a national holiday. As it turns out, however, I don’t have any lectures, labs or tutorials on Mondays anyway so I won’t be missing a session either on February 2nd or on May 4th, another holiday. I will have to miss one on Friday 3rd April (Good Friday), though.

The Timetable has given me two 9 o’clock lectures a week for the forthcoming Semester, one on Tuesdays and the other on Thursdays. I don’t think the students like 9am lectures very much, but I don’t mind them at all. I find it quite agreeable to have accomplished something concrete by 10am, which I don’t always do. This schedule might mean that I defer publishing papers at the Open Journal of Astrophysics on those days. I usually do this before breakfast, but I might not have time if I have to be on campus and ready to teach for 9am.

As usual, Semester 2 is a stop-start affair. We have six weeks until the Study Break, which includes the St Patrick’s Day holiday, then we’re back for two weeks (minus Good Friday) before another week off for Easter. We return on Monday April 13th to complete the Semester; the last lectures are on Friday 8th May and exams start a week later. This arrangement creates no problems for lecture-based teaching, but it takes some planning to organize labs and project deadlines around the breaks. I’ll have to think about that for my Computational Physics module.

A more serious issue for Computational Physics is how to deal with the use of Generative AI. I’ve written about this before, in general terms, but now it’s time to write down some specific rules for a specific module. A default position favoured by some in the Department is that students should not use GenAI at all. I think that would be silly. Graduates will definitely be using CoPilot or equivalent if they write code in the world outside university so we should teach them how to use it properly and effectively.

In particular, such methods usually produce a plausible answer, but how can a student be sure it is correct? It seems to me that we should place an emphasis on what steps a student has taken to check an answer, which of course they should do whether they used GenAI or did it themselves. If it’s a piece of code to do a numerical integration of a differential equation, for example, the student should test it using known analytic solutions to check it gets them right. If it’s the answer to a mathematical problem, one can check whether it does indeed solve the original equation (with the appropriate boundary conditions).

If anyone out there reading this blog has any advice to share, or even a link to their own Department’s policy on the use of GenAI in computational physics for me to copy adapt for use in Maynooth, I’d be very grateful!

(My backup plan is to ask ChatGPT to generate an appropriate policy…)

Marking Over

Posted in Artificial Intelligence, Biographical, mathematics, Maynooth with tags , , , , on January 19, 2026 by telescoper

Well, that wasn’t too painful. I’ve completed my marking duties. The fact that it has been pouring with rain most of the day made it easy to concentrate on this task. I was going to have a break for lunch, but I decided to keep on going until I was finished, though I did have to take a break for a telecon this afternoon. I also had to dash out to the shops, primarily to replenish my stock of food for the garden birds but also to get some groceries for myself. Having skipped lunch I bought myself something nice for supper.

Looking at the departmental database I see that I appear to be the first member of staff to have finished and uploaded all their Semester 1 examination marking. Normally I’m just happy if I’m not the last!

It feels good to have finished this task. It’s definitely a weight off my mind. I wouldn’t want to leave any loose ends when Trumpageddon comes.

I can’t say anything about the results of course but the change I made to continuous assessment, from take-home assignments to class tests, does not seem to have had a negative effect on either group of students I have been teaching. The opposite may indeed have been the case, as the class tests perhaps provide better preparation for the final assessment than the previous method. I think some other lecturers might make a similar switch in future. Anyway, I definitely plan to do something similar for my Semester 2 module on Particle Physics.

Now I have a couple of weeks before teaching resumes so I can get on with other things. For the rest of this week my priority is to finish revising a paper that I hoped to do before Christmas. I’ll see how that goes before deciding what to do next.

I’ll also have to prepare teaching for Semester 2. That shouldn’t be too difficult, as I’ve taught both modules before, but I do have to give some thought as to precisely how I’m going to word the instructions on the use of AI for my Computational Physics module. That can wait a little while, though, as it mainly affects the mini-project to be done towards the end of the Semester. In the meantime I’ll be thinking about other things…

Barry Ward’s Letter about Grok/AI

Posted in Artificial Intelligence with tags , , , , on January 19, 2026 by telescoper

TD Barry Ward, who is also a barrister, has written a letter laying out very clearly why X/Grok could and should be prosecuted immediately under existing Irish law. I’m sharing it in full as it is the public interest. I’ll add my own opinion that the X premises should be raided as soon as possible before evidence can be destroyed.

The letter follows

–o–

To:
Detective Superintendent Pat Ryan
Garda National Cyber Crime Bureau

Dear Superintendent,

You will no doubt be aware of the social media company X and its Grok app, which utilises artificial intelligence to generate pictures and videos. I understand you are also aware that, among its capabilities is the generation, by artificial intelligence, of false images of real people either naked or in bikinis, etc. There has been a great deal of controversy recently about the use of this technology and its ability to target people without their knowledge or consent.

Whatever about the sharing of such images being contrary to the provisions of Coco’s Law (sections 2 and 3 of the Harassment, Harmful Communications and Related Offences Act 2020), the Grok app is also capable of generating child sexual abuse material (CSAM) or child pornography as defined by section 2(1) of the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998 (as substituted by section 9(b) of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2017).

In the circumstances, it seems there are reasonable grounds that the corporate entity X, as owner of Grok, or indeed the corporate entity Grok itself, is acting in contravention of a number of provisions of the Child Trafficking and Pornography Act 1998 (as amended). Inter alia, it is my contention that the following offences are being committed by X, Grok, and/or its subsidiaries:

1.⁠ ⁠Possession of child pornography contrary to section 6(1) in that the material generated by the Grok app must be stored on servers owned and/or operated by X and with the company’s knowledge, in this jurisdiction or in the European Union [subsections 6(3) and (4) would not apply in this case];

2.⁠ ⁠Production of child pornography contrary to section 5(1)(a) as substituted by section 12 of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2017, in that material is being generated by the Grok app, which constitutes child sexual abuse material (CSAM) or child pornography as defined by section 2(1), since it constitutes a visual representation that shows person who is depicted as being a child “being engaged in real or simulated sexually explicit activity” (per paragraph (a)(i) of the definition of child pornography in section 2(1) as amended by section 9(b) of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2017);

3.⁠ ⁠Distribution of chiid pornography contrary to section 5(1)(b) as substituted by section 12 of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2017, in that the said images that constitute child pornography are being distributed, transmitted, disseminated or published to the users of the Grok app by X or its subsidiaries;

4.⁠ ⁠Distribution of chiid pornography contrary to section 5(1)(c) as substituted by section 12 of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2017, in that the Child pornography is being sold to the users of the Grok app by X or its subsidiaries, now that the app has been very publically put behind a pay wall;

5.⁠ ⁠Knowing possession any child pornography for the purpose of distributing, transmitting, disseminating, publishing, exporting, selling or showing same, contrary to section 5(1)(g) as substituted by section 12 of the Criminal Law (Sexual Offences) Act 2017.

You will also be aware that, pursuant to section 9(1) of the 1998 Act, a body corporate is equally liable to be proceeded against and punished as if it were an individual.

Given the foregoing, as well as the public outcry against public decency, it is clear to me that X is flagrantly disregarding the laws of this country put in place by the Oireachtas to protect its citizens.

I am formally lodging this criminal complaint in the anticipation that you will investigate it fully and transmit a file to the Director of Public Prosecutions without delay; I would be grateful to hear from you in this regard.

Yours sincerely,

Barry Ward TD
Senior Counsel

The Counties of the United Kingdom (according to ChatGPT)

Posted in Artificial Intelligence with tags , , , , on December 23, 2025 by telescoper

Regular readers will know that I sometimes use this blog to educate the Great Unwashed about the facts of British geography (including where the North begins). I have decided to enlist the help of Generative AI to support me with this task so, with a little help from social media, here is a response from ChatGPT to a prompt requesting a map showing all the counties of the United Kingdom with their names. The result, as you can see, is truly spectacular:

I began my research career at the University of Bulgaria, by the way.

Black Holes, Hawking Radiation (and AI…)

Posted in Artificial Intelligence, The Universe and Stuff with tags , , , , , on December 7, 2025 by telescoper

It seems to be a common misapprehension that the energy released by the supermassive black holes in, for example, active galactic nuclei is in the form of Hawking radiation. It isn’t. Hawking radiation is only significant for black holes of very low mass. The radiation produced around supermassive black holes is due to the extremely high density and temperate of matter falling into the black hole through an accretion disk not due to the evaporation of the black hole itself. Hawking radiation has never been experimentally detected.

Hawking showed that the a black hole will produce black-body radiation with a temperature, the Hawking Temperature, given by TH in a beautiful formula below that brings together constants relating to gravity, statistical mechanics, quantum theory and relativity:

You can see that the Hawking Temperature is inversely proportional to the mass of the black hole M so is largest for very small black holes. In fact for a black hole with mass of order that of the Moon, the Hawking Temperature is just 3 Kelvin. Since the Universe is bathed in cosmic radiation with this temperature, such a black hole would not evaporate at all because it would absorb as much radiation as it emits by the Hawking mechanism as would any black hole of mass greater than this. The Hawking temperature for a supermassive black hole is many orders of magnitude lower than this, so Hawking radiation is completely irrelevant.

Notice that if a black hole does start to evaporate then its mass begins to decrease. Its Hawking temperature therefore increases so its mass decreases even more quickly. In the end the mass gets so low and the temperature so high that the black hole effectively explodes. Nobody really knows how to describe the final stage as it relies on physics we don’t understand.

Anyway, this all reminds that years ago I set an examination question that involved applying the Hawking formula above to calculate the lifetime of a black hole of mass M. It’s not too hard to show that it scales as M-3. Another part of the question asked: what is the mass of a black hole whose Hawking Temperature is room temperature (say 300 K), what would be the Schwarzschild radius of such a black hole, and what would be its lifetime?

I’ll leave it to my readers to plug the numbers into the Hawking formula above to derive the mass, etc. Please submit your answers through the comments box below. The first correct entry does not win a prize, not even a joke Peace Prize.

For a laugh I asked Google for the answer. Here is the AI summary:

Bonus marks for pointing out everything that’s wrong in this summary.

Eight Years in Maynooth…

Posted in Artificial Intelligence, Biographical, Education, Maynooth with tags , , on December 1, 2025 by telescoper
Maynooth University Library, home of the famous cat

Today is 1st December 2025, which means that it’s eight years to the day since I started work at Maynooth University. Despite the frustrations, I’m still very happy I made the move all that time ago.

We’ve now had more than a year since the merger of the former Departments of Theoretical and Experimental Physics. This has gone pretty well, actually, with significant improvements in terms of some steps forward in rationalising teaching. It does, however, feel less like a merger and more like an acquisition, with the theoretical activity effectively subsumed into the old Experimental Physics department. I suppose that was inevitable given the relative sizes of the two former Departments, but it has led to a loss of identity and the loss of the group spirit we use to have in Theoretical Physics. To add to this a number of familiar faces have left – two of my own PhD students, Aonghus Hunter-McCabe and Aoibhinn Gallagher have graduated and left, as have others with different supervisors. I am delighted for their success, of course, but will miss having them around.

I continue to enjoy teaching, and was pleasantly surprised to continue doing the same modules this academic year as last. The big change in that regard has been the adoption of different assessment methods to deal with the possibility of students using AI to do their coursework. That seems to be going reasonably well, though I’ll have to wait until the January examinations to see the outcomes.

The thing I’m probably most proud of over the past eight years is, with the huge help of staff at Maynooth University Library, getting the Open Journal of Astrophysics off the ground and attracting some excellent papers. This year has seen yet more significant growth, publications this year set to reach 200, after 120 in 2024 and just 50 the year before that (2024). We’re still smaller than many of the mainstream astrophysics journals, but we’re still growing…

Anyway, eight years of service mean that only two remain until I can claim the full state pension. I’ll be retiring as soon as I can afford to. There were Open Days at Maynooth on Friday and Saturday (28th and 29th November, respectively). These were for prospective students to enter in September 2026. Since I don’t teach any first or second year Physics modules now, and that is likely to continue, it looks like I’ll never see any of that intake in class.

More AI garbage

Posted in Artificial Intelligence with tags , , , on November 30, 2025 by telescoper

I’m indebted to a post on Mastodon for drawing my attention to a blog post about a paper with the title Bridging the gap: explainable ai for autism diagnosis and parental support with TabPFNMix and SHAP that appeared in the journal Nature Scientific Reports (which claims to be peer-reviewed).

Here is Figure 1 of that paper:

I’m no expert on Autism Diagnosis, but I’m pretty sure that neither “Fexcectorn” nor “frymblal” (medical or otherwise) nor “runctitional” are words in the English language. Why do the person’s legs go through the table? And why is Autism represented by a bicycle? This nonsensical figure was clearly generated by AI, as is much of the text of the paper. How on Earth did this crap pass peer review?

Still, Nature Scientific Reports is indexed in Scopus, which we all know is a watertight guarantee of quality…

P.S. The article was published on 19th November 2025. It is now prefaced by an Editor’s Note: “Readers are alerted that the contents of this paper are subject to criticisms that are being considered by editors. A further editorial response will follow the resolution of these issues.”

A month to go

Posted in Artificial Intelligence, Biographical, Education, mathematics, Maynooth with tags , , , , , on November 25, 2025 by telescoper

I’ve been a bit preoccupied these recent weeks so it was with a shock that I realised that we’re into Week 9, which means just four weeks (including this one) until the end of term and just a month before Christmas. Teaching finishes here in Maynooth on Friday 19th December, but I don’t have any lectures on Fridays so in my case it will finish the day before (with a tutorial). I don’t know how many students will be there, but the module concerned is my 4th year Mathematical Physics module and the students are very hard-working, so I think most will attend. After such a busy term I’m sure that they will need a break as much as I will.

I had to rejig the schedule for both modules I am teaching this semester to accommodate the introduction of in-class tests to replace take-home assignments (for reasons I outlined here). I’ve also been handing out voluntary exercises for practice, not counting towards the module mark but for formative reasons. Both modules are mathematical in nature, and I think the best way to learn mathematics is by doing it…

Despite the changes with respect to last year, I am still roughly on track. In my Engineering Mathematics module I’ve just finished Laplace transforms, and will start Fourier methods tomorrow. With the mathematical physicists, I am in the middle of complex analysis, having done complex differentiation and conformal mappings and starting complex integration next week.

I still have a couple more class tests to get through. On the positive side, the students are turning up for them and have expressed approval for the fact that they don’t have compulsory homework to do off-campus. This form of assessment is undoubtedly harder work for the students, it’s also better preparation for the examination that take-home assignments.

We’ve just received the draft examination timetable for January, and I’m pleased that both of the examinations for which I am responsible will take place quite early in the examination period (on 12th and 15th January, respectively) so I should be able to get them corrected in time to have a break for some research before teaching resumes at the start of February.

Testing Times

Posted in Artificial Intelligence, Education, mathematics, Maynooth with tags , , , , on October 17, 2025 by telescoper

As it was foretold, I conducted my first set of my new-style in-class tests this week. These tests, as I mentioned a while ago,  were introduced because of concerns about the integrity of the coursework element of my modules in the light of improvements in Generative AI.

The main events – one for each of my modules – were both yesterday, but one student couldn’t make it at the scheduled time (for good reasons) so I set a special test this morning, which is now over. Because access to the internet is not allowed these tests are invigilated.

It’s been quite a while since I was last required to invigilate a full examination. I think it was back in Nottingham days, actually. I never enjoyed this task even though I took work to do it wasn’t really possible to do much as one had to keep one’s eyes on the students. Crosswords could be done; these are good in this situation because you can solve a few clues at a time. It was disappointing if I happened to take one that was easy enough to do quickly, as there was little to stave off the boredom after completing it. Other things I used to do included counting the number of right-handed and left-handed students, though I never did any detailed statistical analysis of the results.

Anyway, my recent class tests were a bit different. Designed to fit in a lecture slot of 50 minutes duration, they were much shorter than traditional end-of-year exams. They were also “open-book” style, so students could bring anything on paper that they wanted. Phones and laptops were, however, forbidden. During these tests I just sat quietly with my laptop getting some work done, with an occasional glance at the students. It was actually nice to be locked away like this with no disturbance. Time passed very quickly, actually, though perhaps not as quickly as it did for the students taking the tests.

When I first told the students that the tests would be “open-book”, I think they all assumed that would make them easy. I don’t think that was the case, however, as the questions are designed so that the answers can’t be obtained immediately by looking them up in a textbook. Also, having things on paper rather than in your head does slow you down. I’ve never seen much point in examinations as speed tests. I designed this week’s tests so that the questions could be done in about 30 minutes, but the formal duration was 50 minutes. I encouraged students who finished early to use the remaining time to check their work, but some did leave early.

This new regime also meant I had number of teaching sessions without the exertion of having to do any actual teaching, which was nice. The downside is, of course, that I now have stacks of class tests to correct. That will be payback time.

I won’t know how well the students have coped until I have got their grades, but informal feedback was that they seemed reasonably content with the new method of assessment. I’ll be doing the next ones in about three weeks.

When will the AI Bubble burst?

Posted in Artificial Intelligence, Finance, mathematics with tags , , , , on October 12, 2025 by telescoper

I’m not a financial expert, but I have noticed a significant number of articles in the media suggesting that the Generative AI industry is a bubble waiting to burst. There are recent pieces here on the BBC website, here in the Financial Times (from which I stole the cartoon), and here in the Irish Times, to name but a few.

These stories are based on reports by the Bank of England and the International Monetary Fund, warning of a stock market crash far worse than the dotcom boom-and-bust of 2000 and even the banking crisis of 2008. Over 30% of the valuation of the US stock market, for example, lies in five big technology companies that are investing heavily in the enormous infrastructure required for AI. Their extravagant capital expenditure is underpinned by a complex series of financial arrangements which could unravel very quickly if the investors get cold feet and consider it unlikely they will see a return on their money. It does look very much like a bubble to me.

My own view is that the claims made about the capabilities of AI by tech gurus are grossly overstated. Only the irredeemably gullible could think otherwise. I think a correction is inevitable. It’s not a question of “if” but “when” and “how much”. I am not competent to answer those questions.

P.S. Now there’s an RTÉ Brainstorm piece along the same lines…