Read this before interpreting the figures
- The figures indicate trends, not exact values. “Unclear” cases are shown separately and never added to declared use.
- The classifier makes errors.
- Only explicit written declarations are counted. Undeclared AI use is invisible here.
About the figures
Known weaknesses: explicit statements that AI was not used can be counted as declared use, and names such as “Claude” often produce “unclear”. “Unclear” marks possible declarations; in the tests most of them were not declarations.
Each paper is counted once, under its primary category; “All mathematics” also includes papers from other archives cross-listed to mathematics.
Category figures are weekly or monthly (the default). Their status and use counts always cover a group of at least a minimum number of classified papers and do not say which paper in the group has which result.
Summary
Declared AI use
–
Unclear (possible declaration)
–
Announced papers
–
Full text classified
–
Declared AI use and unclear cases
- Declared use
- Unclear (possible declaration, not included in declared use)
Papers announced
Show data table
What the declared use was for
Papers can have several categories, so the lines do not add up. The four most frequent categories are shown first.
Show data table
Method and related work
Each paper’s first-version PDF in the arXiv mathematics listings, cross-lists included, is searched for AI terms; a text classifier gives each paper a status and stated purposes. Papers count on their announcement day (reconstructed before ; a check matched of papers). Status counts of groups under 10 classified papers are withheld.
Stylometric estimates measure LLM-writing traces, declared or not (Liang et al. 2025); explicit disclosures are far rarer than such traces (He and Bu 2026) and, in computer science, typically brief and at odds with what readers expect (Mohapatra and Pruthi 2026). This dashboard counts explicit declarations only, a subset of actual use, with classifier errors in both directions. The closest prior work used a language model to classify disclosed AI use in arXiv mathematics papers posted 1 March – 20 August 2026 (Jin, Ke and Sui 2026).
- Jin, J., Ke, Z. T., & Sui, B. (2026). The Gold Rush in AI4Math: Where Are We Now? arXiv:2608.24961
- He, Y., & Bu, Y. (2026). Academic journals’ AI policies fail to curb the surge in AI-assisted academic writing. PNAS 123(9), e2526734123. doi:10.1073/pnas.2526734123
- Mohapatra, A., & Pruthi, D. (2026). Expectations and Practices around AI Disclosure in CS Research. arXiv:2608.23271
- Liang, W., et al. (2025). Quantifying large language model usage in scientific papers. Nature Human Behaviour 9(12), 2599–2609. doi:10.1038/s41562-025-02273-8
arXiv’s policy on generative AI language tools asks authors to report significant use.
Source code and documentation