AI 时代学术努力与人才聘用的博弈论分析

View PDF HTML (experimental)

Abstract:Many academic disciplines (in particular, mathematics and the theoretical sciences) face difficult questions about how to adapt their practices to the rise of highly capable artificial intelligence (AI). Before AI, a well-written research paper with a strong theoretical result acted as a reliable signal that its authors understood their field in depth. Now that AI is widely accessible, such signals have become cheaper to produce. As a result, they no longer reliably sort academics by their level of understanding. This has direct consequences for academic hiring. The age of AI raises a question for each side of the academic job market. Should an early-career researcher invest in a deep understanding of their field, or instead use AI to build a longer resume with many papers? Should a recruiter favor applicants with fewer papers who pass an interview aimed at probing understanding, or insist on both publication volume and a pass? In this paper, we develop a game-theoretic model of this two-sided dilemma. We classify all pure-strategy equilibria that can arise in this game and use learning simulations to identify the behaviors that populations of applicants and recruiters may learn to adopt. Our analysis provides a framework for reasoning about how academic hiring can adapt to AI and for evaluating practices that preserve the value of deep understanding.

Comments:	30 pages, seven visualizations (four figures, three tables)
Subjects:	Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI); Computers and Society (cs.CY); Computer Science and Game Theory (cs.GT)
Cite as:	arXiv:2610.35802 [cs.AI]
	(or arXiv:2610.35802v1 [cs.AI] for this version)
	https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2610.35802 arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)

Submission history

From: Peter S. Park [view email]
[v1] Mon, 26 Oct 2026 17:35:30 UTC (310 KB)