Recent years have seen the dramatic rise of the usage of AI algorithms in pure mathematics and fundamental sciences such as theoretical physics. This is perhaps counter-intuitive since mathematical sciences require the rigorous definitions, derivations, and proofs, in contrast to the experimental sciences which rely on the modelling of data with error-bars. In this Perspective, we categorize the approaches to mathematical discovery as "top-down", "bottom-up" and "meta-mathematics", as inspired by historical examples. We review some of the progress over the last few years, comparing and contrasting both the advances and the short-comings in each approach. We argue that while the theorist is in no way in danger of being replaced by AI in the near future, the hybrid of human expertise and AI algorithms will become an integral part of theoretical discovery.
We provide an example of the application of quantitative techniques, tools, and topics from mathematics and data science to analyze the mathematics community itself in order to quantify and document inequity in our discipline. This work is a contribution to the new and growing interdisciplinary field recently termed "mathematics of Mathematics," or "MetaMath." Using data about PhD-granting institutions in the United States and publicly available funding data from the National Science Foundation, we highlight inequalities in departments at U.S. institutions of higher education that produce PhDs in the mathematical sciences. Specifically, we determine that a small fraction of mathematical sciences departments receive a large majority of federal funding awarded to support mathematics in the United States. Additionally, we identify the extent to which women faculty members are underrepresented in mathematical sciences PhD-granting institutions in the United States. We also show that this underrepresentation of women faculty is even more pronounced in departments that received more federal grant funding.