arXiv:2505. 18492v5 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Mathematical competition problems fall into two broad types: theorem proving, which asks for a proof of a given statement, and answer construction, which requires constructing a property-satifying object with proofs.
By Jialiang Sun, Yuzhi Tang, Ao Li, Chris J. Maddison, Kuldeep S. Meel
arXiv:2610.17358v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Formal verification proves that a program satisfies its specification, but says nothing about whether the specification captures what the author mean...
By Martin Amster, One An, Holly Baker, Fernanda Graciolli, Simon Henniger, Nada Amin
arXiv:2606. 16541v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Autoformalization, translating natural-language mathematics into formal proof assistants, is bottlenecked not by translation fluency but by \emph{faithfulness}: a formal statement can typecheck and be provable, yet still encode a different theorem than the source intended.
By Noor Islam S. Mohammad, Tamim Sheikh
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
The paper introduces a reference‑free proxy‑judge framework for autoformalization, separating correctness into grounding, statement faithfulness, coverage, and inference. It presents three theoretical results linking proxy error rates to pass‑but‑wrong rates, the impact of false rejections on refinement, and a decomposition of final pass rates. The framework is instantiated with eight proxies and evaluated on ProofNet, miniF2F, e‑SNLI, and ProntoQA, showing that the predictions hold and identifying failure routes.
By Lei Xu, Xin Quan, Andr\'e Freitas
arXiv:2607. 16372v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Interactive theorem proving (ITP) underpins program verification and formalized mathematics, but its manual effort limits scalability.
By Qiyuan Xu, Joshua Ong Jun Leang, Renxi Wang, Wenda Li, Haonan Li, Luke Ong, Conrad Watt
arXiv:2608.28639v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: Formal theorem proving with large language models remains challenging due to the difficulty of navigating large proof search spaces efficiently. Existi...
By Bodla Krishna Vamshi, Haizhao Yang
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
arXiv:2610.34490v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: In formal systems such as Lean 4, efficiently finding answers to mathematical problems and generating verifiable proofs is an important task in autom...
By Pengzhen Lin, Ke Zhang, Maziar Raissi, Zhouxing Shi
arXiv:2608. 05420v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) can generate text that resembles a mathematical proof, but resemblance does not establish correctness.
By Ahmed Ryan, Md Erfan, Akond Ashfaque Ur Rahman, Md Rayhanur Rahman
arXiv:2607. 13069v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models produce chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning that appears logically sound yet may not genuinely depend on its stated premises.
By Hironao Nakamura
arXiv:2610.17697v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: AI systems now write long and difficult mathematical proofs, and checking their step-by-step validity is becoming a bottleneck. A learned verifier co...
By Rodney Lafuente-Mercado, Salman Rahman, Jingyan Shen, James Shiffer, Saadia Gabriel, Pavel Izmailov