Hugging Face Trending Papers

Towards a Certifying Grounder

Grounding, the translation of high-level theories into equivalent quantifier-free formulas, is a crucial step in declarative solving, yet it has so far escaped the proof-logging revolution. When this grounding step is not certifying, there is no way of knowing that the obtained solutions actually correspond to the original problem specification, resulting in a trust gap.

arXiv AI
Jul 24

Towards a Certifying Grounder

arXiv:2607. 21199v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Grounding, the translation of high-level theories into equivalent quantifier-free formulas, is a crucial step in declarative solving, yet it has so far escaped the proof-logging revolution.

By Daimy Van Caudenberg, Alexander Ek, Carlos Cantero, Bart Bogaerts
arXiv AI
Sep 12

Extending SMT Solving with Non-Ground Clause Learning

The paper introduces a new calculus that integrates ground instantiations, CDCL(T)-style rules, and non‑ground conflict analysis for SMT solving. By performing resolution on the original non‑ground clauses, the solver learns more general, often non‑redundant clauses, potentially yielding exponentially shorter proofs. The approach also incorporates chronological backtracking and is shown to simulate several existing solving frameworks, including CDCL, SCL(FOL), SCL(T), and Resolution.

By Yasmine Briefs, Christoph Weidenbach
arXiv AI
Aug 28

FaithSieve: Fine-Grained Evaluation of Math Proofs with Faithful Formal Evidence

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 Computation and Language
Aug 28

Neuro-symbolic PRM: Enhancing Scientific Reasoning via Structured Traces and Symbolic Verification

The paper introduces a neuro‑symbolic framework for scientific reasoning that separates symbolic validity and semantic groundedness. A deterministic symbolic verifier acts as a hard filter to guarantee syntactic and arithmetic correctness, while a Process Reward Model (PRM) is trained on verifier‑accepted steps to assess contextual grounding. The authors propose Counterfactual Symbolic Perturbation (CSP) to generate hard negative examples that pass the verifier but are logically flawed, enabling efficient PRM training and a verifier‑first constrained search at inference.

By Yuxin Zi, Cong Xu, Suparna Bhattacharya, Martin Foltin, Amit Sheth