arXiv:2602. 02881v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: This paper articulates a long-term research vision for formal methods at the intersection with artificial intelligence, outlining multiple conceptual and technical dimensions and reporting on our ongoing work toward realising this vision.
arXiv:2604. 26578v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Reusing verification artefacts requires identifying structural and semantic similarities across programs and their specifications.
arXiv:2608. 03609v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Agentic systems driven by large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in real-world workflows where they act on persistent operational data.
HybridProver is a unified framework that combines whole-proof synthesis and tactic-based generation using proof sketches as an intermediate representation. Implemented in Isabelle/HOL, it employs two 7B-scale LLMs trained on optimized Isabelle datasets. On the miniF2F Isabelle benchmark, HybridProver achieved a 73.8% success rate, surpassing the previous state of the art of 61.9%, and ablation studies examined the effects of dataset quality, training settings, and sampling strategies.
arXiv:2511. 09008v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Large Language Models perform well at natural language interpretation and reasoning, but their lack of formal correctness guarantees limits their adoption in regulated industries like finance and health-care that operate under strict policies.
arXiv:2606. 16010v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models have achieved impressive performance on reasoning tasks spanning mathematics, science, programming, and commonsense inference.
arXiv:2605. 20531v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Reliable verification of proofs remains a bottleneck for training and evaluating AI systems on hard mathematical reasoning.
The paper introduces Proof‑R1, a reinforcement‑learning framework that trains large language models to generate verifiable proofs for natural‑language logical reasoning tasks. Proof‑R1 only accepts a generated conclusion into the proof state when it satisfies formal verification constraints, ensuring each reasoning step is machine‑checkable. The method also reconstructs the dependency closure that supports the final answer, aligning credit with valid proof steps, and shows improved answer accuracy and verifiability across multiple benchmarks and models.
arXiv:2607. 04631v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The cost of producing code is rapidly diminishing with increasingly capable AI agents, while quality assurance of generated programs has not kept pace.
arXiv:2606. 26525v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Auto-formalization is critical for scalable formal verification, but existing progress largely focuses on isolated statements, while theory-scale auto-formalization, which coherently translates hundreds of interdependent definitions, lemmas, and theorems, remains open due to challenges in consistency, faithfulness, scalability, and correctness.
arXiv:2606. 13925v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models can often close proof gaps in interactive theorem provers, but a verified theorem is not the same thing as a reusable library contribution.
arXiv:2607. 19407v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Formal theorem proving has emerged as a frontier challenge for machine learning, yet the ecosystem is fragmented: proofs remain siloed across incompatible systems, limiting both training data for learning-based provers and the portability of verified results.
arXiv:2606. 16603v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: LLM-based agents have demonstrated strong capabilities in data-intensive analytical tasks, yet their outputs are rarely verifiable: a reliance on linear text trajectories makes their reasoning difficult to audit.