The paper introduces a source‑grounded framework that represents mathematical arguments as directed acyclic graphs, incorporating numbered and unnumbered statements, equations, assumptions, and constructions while distinguishing source occurrences from contextual states and inference records. It defines measurement metrics such as depth (longest prerequisite path) and bulk (distinct ancestor edges), and provides a standardized, versioned prompt protocol for annotation discovery, deterministic recomputation, and review assistance. The framework also supports cross‑paper links to explore theorem co‑use, rare combinations, and dependency communities, aiming to motivate probabilistic premise suggestions and review of omissions or unchecked conditions in both human‑written and AI‑generated proofs.
arXiv:2606. 08728v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Mathematical reasoning has long served as a stringent test of machine intelligence; over the past decade, it has moved from a niche problem within NLP to one of the most consequential AI frontiers.
By Syed Rifat Raiyan, Mohsinul Kabir, Hasan Mahmud, Md Kamrul Hasan
LeanGraphSearch is a graph‑based retrieval method for the Lean 4 theorem prover that builds a dependency graph from Mathlib’s forward dependencies and traverses it to find supporting lemmas via multi‑hop chains. By linking each declaration to its premises, propagating relevance through a graph‑ranking algorithm, and re‑ranking candidates against the original query, it improves recall by up to 12% over LeanSearch v2 on MathlibQR and increases coverage of complete annotated proof routes on MathlibMPR by up to 3.7%. When integrated into an iterative proving loop, LeanGraphSearch raises pass rates at 8, 16, and 32 reflection turns by as much as 40% compared to a vanilla prover and up to 10% compared to LeanSearch v2, demonstrating higher accuracy‑cost efficiency.
By Yihan Xu, Jia-Chen Gu, Junyi Zhang, Di Wu, Haikang Deng, Po-Nien Kung, Kai-Wei Chang, Amit Sahai, Wei Wang, Nanyun Peng
arXiv:2604. 03789v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Recent advances in large language models have significantly improved their ability to perform mathematical reasoning, extending from elementary problem solving to increasingly capable performance on research-level problems.
By Haocheng Ju, Guoxiong Gao, Jiedong Jiang, Bin Wu, Zeming Sun, Shurui Liu, Leheng Chen, Yutong Wang, Yuefeng Wang, Zichen Wang, Wanyi He, Peihao Wu, Liang Xiao, Ruochuan Liu, Bryan Dai, Bin Dong
arXiv:2608. 15432v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In formal verification, both the autoformalization of statements and automated proof search have been studied extensively.
By Tadd Mao, Tianjun Zhong, Dhruva Arekar, Yuming Feng, One An, Jiani Huang, Xujie Si, Ziyang Li
The paper introduces OpenConjecture, a dataset of mathematical conjectures from arXiv papers since February 2026, and evaluates frontier GPT models on 200 randomly sampled conjectures. The models generate candidate solutions for about 60% of the conjectures, with counterexamples occurring roughly 1.3 times more often than proofs. The study examines solution novelty, citation practices, and fidelity to the original statements, finding that some solutions deviate from authors’ intent and that many proofs closely follow existing results, though some exhibit moderate novelty.
By Helen Jenne, Davis Brown, Jesse He, Henry Kvinge
FaithSieve is a Lean‑assisted framework that fine‑grains natural‑language mathematical proofs into local reasoning units, extracts typed proof obligations, and verifies them with formal evidence gated by semantic alignment. It introduces two expert‑verified datasets—ProofLoc‑Olympiad and ProofLoc‑University—to benchmark first‑error localization. On these benchmarks, FaithSieve outperforms direct‑judging baselines, achieving 81.43% and 84.5% exact first‑error accuracy respectively.
By Ziyu Wang, Qiming Dai, Yishan Wu, Zaiwen Wen
arXiv:2610.17090v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: On 6 October 2026 OpenAI published an initial 722 AI-written mathematical manuscripts, organized into 372 problem families, in the public repository...
By Ying Xie
arXiv:2606. 10799v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) struggle to rigorously verify complex mathematical proofs.
By Yifeng Sun
The paper introduces a method for evaluating the intrinsic interestingness of mathematical theorems by comparing the length of their proofs to the length of their statements. It trains a 27B language model to predict proof difficulty, enabling the generation and selection of more interesting theorems while significantly reducing overlap with existing Mathlib. The approach allows iterative expansion of a self‑building, machine‑verified mathematical library guided by quantifiable metrics.
By Niket Patel, Ahmad Rammal, Amaury Hayat, Remi Munos, Julia Kempe
The paper introduces GUARD, a neuro‑symbolic system that autoformalizes argumentative material by completing missing premises (guards) before formal verification. It uses large language models to generate candidate guards, Isabelle/HOL to verify them, and a contrastive test to ensure the proof depends on the original premises and does not over‑generalize. Experiments on Debatepedia and ARCT show that GUARD improves verified‑faithful scores by over 30 points and reduces leakage by about 20 points compared to prior LLM‑driven theorem proving methods.
By Xin Quan, Reto Gubelmann, Andr\'e Freitas
arXiv:2606. 28841v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models are increasingly capable of mathematical reasoning, but the proofs they generate are often unreliable and hard to verify.
By Santhana Srinivasan R, Maithilee Patawar