It's my understanding that at least some mathematical research already works like this. "AIs" have been able to come up with proofs for theorems for quite a while, so I asked a prof a couple of years ago why these machines haven't mined out the mathematical universe yet. Apparently, they are being used but mainly to prospect ... and human mathematicans play the role ofthe article wrote: They'd take everything we wrote as a seed and produce a nearly endless forest of new content. If even 0.01% of that is useful, that's a Wikipedia's worth of good ideas. Then what is our job? To sort through it? Except of course someday they will do that for us also.

*sorting*through the output to look for the usual goals of elegance, etc. To wit, human mathematicians aren't happy with a 100 page proof even if it is a valid proof if there's an elegant way to do it in 1 page, say. In short, theorems weren't seen as much as a "end" (like they are to this physicist) as much as a "means" to improve human thinking and/or look for mathematical "beauty".