Perhaps not surprising that ChatGPT comes up with a comprehensive proof of the primes' indefiniteness, but does compare for me to my earlier proof in old study material.

The current package for AI in Maple gives 5 commands, but it will be limited in its use for doing math in Maple.
The AI lacks resourcefulness and knowledge to replace a human as well.

I don't see it happening yet here on Maple primes, that all questions for Maple will be answered by AI chatGPT.

Have asked chatGPT a question :
Can chatGPT be self-learning ?
ChatGPT
Yes, in a sense ChatGPT can be self-learning, albeit in a limited way. While the model itself does not evolve or learn in the traditional sense as humans do, it can be improved through new training with more data or refinement of algorithms. OpenAI, the company behind ChatGPT, can regularly update and refine the model based on feedback and new technological developments. These updates help ChatGPT provide increasingly better answers and adapt to changes in language and knowledge.  

Was working a while back on the complex numbers and the Riemann hypothesis here on the forum
Also was then trying to master programming procedures.
But let's see what the AI can help me clarify something with these topics.
Already used the AI with some math questions via chatGPT direct and did get some new insight then. 

Through chatGPT, I can ask for simple procedures in Maple.
Is it possible to have built-in Maple procedures analysed by AI ?
I asked Maple the question in Dutch : give an extensive proof that the number of prime numbers is infinite. 
I got an extensive answer in English and Dutch of the proof and what looked fine

Thanks, haven't visited this forum in a long time.
Have had a lot of good help there. 
Thanks again for this.
Oh, it's the other way around : An experimental interface package loaded in Maple that communicates with ChatGPT
Before this I read that Mathematica is offered as a plugin in chatGPT pro (paid)
What are the experiences with this with this language model in Maple?

The ability in Maple or to see which language model is connected ?

I do read here more messages about  deleted questions
While ago is also deleted the answering of my post 

Isn't one of the moderators the culprit here , who removes post just like that?

To get idea how to doing a proof by induction

Its here solved with Mathematica 

Mathematica Tutorial 12 - Proof by Induction - Bing video
 

In this case its a sum ,so you need a another solutionstrategy

I don't see my thread here anymore ?

What is happened?

Is it removed or something malfunctioning on the website ?

@janhardo 

The presentation of this format of a complex function, here in this example is not accepted by the procedure :  

What is representation of f(z)  = with variable z ?

@acer 

Thanks

I wrote:  I must differentiate z = e^i.phi   in order to get the differential dz

In normal math format i was thinking for the expression here above notated
Indeed it must be  z(phi) = exp(i.phi) for maple and the procedure can differentiate this rightside of the equation! 

dz= z(phi)'. d(phi)     (dz is differential of z )

@janhardo 

The complex function must be "analytic" in order to possible differentiate it 
note: i must look at information for complex functions classes who are proven analytic 

Download reactie_op_complex_differentieren_in_gemaakte_procedure.mw

@acer 

Thanks

"I really hope that you understand that it is impossible for anyone to create a procedure that will produce your as-yet-unstated, desired form of output for all future examples which are not yet known. That is not a Maple thing; it is a logical consequence."

That would be Maplemagical , but i don't believe in fairy tales ( although some people say: it was a fairy tale what they have experienced)

@acer
 Thanks 

You are right ,guessing a intended scope is not workable.

Instead of working all this out in Maple, i show you a  link
Nieuwe pagina 1 (hhofstede.nl) ( in Dutch)
You do see a circle and left of it some math written and above the intergral is written  z= e^i .phi  so,  dz= i.e^i.phi 
dz is differential (already  calculated here) and in general  dy = f '(x) . dx 

I must differentiate z = e^i.phi   in order to get the differential dz
Can the "differentiate procedure" handle complex differentiating maybe? 

Hopefully its clear now i hope, or not and do you want it worked out in Maple the problem description ?

@janhardo 

Don't know how the procedure is behaving for complex differentiating ?

Example : would calculate a differential  for  z= e^i. phi   => dz=  ...d(elta)phi 

@acer 

Thanks

That is a powerful procedure that differentiates all kinds of functions !
For intergration, such a procedure would also be useful and call the indefinite integral: the primitive ( F(x) ). 
The suppression of notation is useful for memorizing certain differentiation rules.

combine(diff(eq, x), power) seems to be also useful for differentation ( what is the advantage here ?) 

@acer 

Thanks

Goal was to derive the powerrule in  textbook form and its easy to type in that form in Maple

Download post_maple_primes-algemen_formules_afgeleides.mw

@acer 

Thanks

I needed the other way around as teached in math books for differentiating  

in textbook form it is 

Its impossible to get a general approach to learn for me to get  a general formula for differentiating a (complex) functions

That was the start for this thread, a intergral formula from Caughy in Complex analysis