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.
arXiv:2606. 14867v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Proof autoformalization aims to translate a mathematical informal proof written in natural language into a formal proof in a formal language such as Lean~4.
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.
arXiv:2608. 15432v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In formal verification, both the autoformalization of statements and automated proof search have been studied extensively.
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.
arXiv:2611.06962v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Proof assistants such as Lean check mathematical proofs down to the axioms, and AI agents have recently made writing such proofs cheap. We describe Aut...
arXiv:2606. 31134v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: While Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated exceptional capabilities in mathematical reasoning, they frequently produce subtle errors that evade human detection.
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.
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.
PaperFormalizer is a Lean-based pipeline that assists authors in identifying and closing gaps in their research papers, converting them into Lean-verified versions. Starting from LaTeX, it transcribes the paper into a dependency graph, audits statements for faithfulness and correctness, and formalizes them in Lean using Mathlib and optional domain libraries. The process is author-in-the-loop, prompting the author whenever multiple interpretations exist and allowing them to accept, decline, or redirect proposed repairs, ultimately producing an annotated paper, a change report, and linked Lean code.
The paper introduces an epistemically and formally grounded ensemble (EFG) of large language model judges to evaluate autoformalization tasks in formal mathematics. It defines four criteria—logical preservation, mathematical consistency, formal quality, and formal validity—to provide a transparent, multi‑granular assessment. Experiments show that this ensemble outperforms coarse‑grained models, offering a scalable and interpretable proxy for evaluating formal mathematical reasoning.
arXiv:2508.02208v3 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Evaluating the mathematical capability of Large Language Models (LLMs) is a critical yet challenging frontier. Existing benchmarks fall short...