URL? I can try to take a look and pick 2 or 3 I like, as a recommendation to post here. (Anyway, it's difficult to predict what the hivemind will upvote.) (Which are your 2 or 3 favorites?)
It's astounding that the thought to dissociate one of the mathematicians from the proposed publication was driven by their corporate institutional affiliation - and that that exclusion was suggested by a scientist themselves! This is like a researcher from CMU saying to an NYU researcher that their collaborator, being from MIT, is a problem - this is as ridiculous as that!
Progress in humanity's knowledge now has to play second fiddle to narrow corporate interests as IPO timings near (both of which wouldn't exist anyway if generations of mathematicians hadn't paved the way for AIs to become as good as they have).
The scientist allegedly making that request comes from a machine learning background. Perhaps he's not familiar with the culture in mathematics regarding authorship. That sort of squabbling over author priority would be unconscionable to mathematicians.
Thank you. That indeed appears to be the best approach.
Judging by some other comments here, I sense many people here (just like much of the internet) are just angry by default for some reason and assume no prior effort on the part of the poster rather than offer solutions to what is a legitimate business problem.
There are two fundamental problems: one is the inability to admit mistakes and shed the false aura of omniscience in front of customers, investors or employees. The second (almost a corollary of the first) is overpromising and, as a result, underdelivering because those who face the customers/investors want to appear infallible.
reply