arXiv:2607. 13921v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Languages with rich static semantics, such as Rust, provide stronger guarantees for AI-generated code, but their strictness makes generation more difficult.
By Niels M\"undler-Sasahara, Hristo Venev, Dawn Song, Martin Vechev, Jingxuan He
arXiv:2607. 06341v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Formal verification offers the strongest guarantee of software correctness, but it does not scale: the proofs demanded by interactive theorem provers such as Coq require enormous expert effort.
By Shuangxiang Kan, Shuanglong Kan, Sebastian Ertel
Formal verification offers the strongest guarantee of software correctness, but it does not scale: the proofs demanded by interactive theorem provers such as Coq require enormous expert effort. Large language models (LLMs) promise to generate these proofs automatically, yet existing approaches wire a fixed, human-designed proof strategy into the system and constrain the model to follow it (retrieving premises and predicting tactics one step at a time, or splitting goals by divide-and-conquer), and still prove only a fraction of their target theorems.
arXiv:2606. 15258v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly capable of mathematical problem solving and can even assist with research-level proofs, yet we still lack a scalable and reproducible way to measure step-level reasoning in long proofs across diverse sources.
By Jierui Zhang, Siyuan Tan, Xinhang Li, Longzhuangzhi Lin, Dailin Li, Chengfeng Gu, Xinping Li, Yaxian Hao, Shengjia Liang, Yuxiang Ren, Wenhao Liu
arXiv:2512. 10187v3 Announce Type: replace Abstract: LLMs excel at reasoning, but validating their steps remains challenging.
By Mantas Baksys, Stefan Zetzsche, Olivier Bouissou, Sean B. Holden
Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable performance on high-school and olympiad-style mathematics, yet their capabilities on advanced mathematics remain poorly understood. Existing benchmarks, however, fall short in both scope and evaluation granularity: they provide limited disciplinary coverage and often rely on final-answer correctness or coarse judgments, leaving the validity of the reasoning process inadequately assessed.
arXiv:2603. 19329v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) can generate plausible code but offer limited guarantees of correctness.
By Zenan Li, Ziran Yang, Deyuan He, Haoyu Zhao, Andrew Zhao, Shange Tang, Kaiyu Yang, Aarti Gupta, Zhendong Su, Chi Jin
arXiv:2603. 05290v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) achieve promising performance, yet their ability to reason remains poorly understood.
By Tianxi Gao, Yufan Cai, Yusi Yuan, Jin Song Dong
arXiv:2608. 13681v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Translating C code into safe, idiomatic Rust is a longstanding software-engineering goal because it can eliminate entire classes of memory-safety vulnerabilities while preserving the functional behavior of legacy systems.
By Pu Zhao, Changdi Yang, Yixiao Chen, Yi Gao, Yifan Cao, Haochen Zeng, Yanzhi Wang
arXiv:2606. 19588v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Formal tools such as SAT and SMT solvers are increasingly embedded in language model reasoning pipelines when a safety or security critical question can be formulated in logic.
By Zunchen Huang, Songgaojun Deng
arXiv:2606. 12594v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Modern Lean theorem provers achieve strong performance only with substantial training and inference compute, driven in part by scarce verified proof data and the long reasoning traces of formal proof search, making both supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and sampling expensive.
By Joshua Ong Jun Leang, Zheng Zhao, Mihaela C\u{a}t\u{a}lina Stoian, Qiyuan Xu, Haonan Li, Wenda Li, Shay B. Cohen, Eleonora Giunchiglia
LLMs have recently achieved strong results on formal proving benchmarks. However, existing evaluations remain heavily concentrated on competition-style problems and often fail to capture how models behave on longer, more dependency-rich mathematical developments.