arXiv:2608.28997v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: In May 2026 an OpenAI model produced a counterexample to the Erd\H{o}s unit distance conjecture. Five mathematicians published a human-verified version...
By Maher Kallel, Mohamed El Louadi
The paper introduces Rewindable Interactive Proofs (RIPs), a new model for scalable oversight where a weak verifier can rewind a powerful AI prover to an earlier state during interaction. RIPs enable verification of oracle‑aided computations that are robust to small changes in oracle answers, achieving near‑linear verifier time without relying on cryptography. The authors provide a construction, implement it on MNIST, and demonstrate that RIPs can outperform existing proof systems in practice.
By Ziyi Guan, Yael Tauman Kalai, Ron Rothblum, Zoe Xi
The paper examines how AI‑written research papers often contain misattributed numerical claims. By re‑analyzing 540 judgments from a benchmark of nine AI agents on fifteen research problems, the authors manually labeled 256 claims and found that most failures stem from misalignment between the paper and the underlying work rather than outright cheating. They propose a deterministic claim‑to‑evidence checker that achieves over 90% precision and, when combined with an LLM verifier, offers a more reliable audit of AI‑generated research.
By Mosab Alfaqeeh, Omar Hourani, Muath Hourani, Hashem Alfaqeeh
arXiv:2607. 25637v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: F(AI)2R is FAIR research with AI in the loop, twice: an AI-assisted authoring pass and a machine-readable audit pass over every artefact.
By Florian Krebs
The paper introduces Rewindable Interactive Proofs (RIPs), a new model for scalable oversight where a weak verifier can rewind a powerful AI prover to an earlier state during interaction. RIPs enable efficient verification of computations whose outputs are robust to small changes in oracle answers, achieving near-linear verifier time without relying on cryptography. The authors implement the protocol, demonstrate a preliminary MNIST experiment, and show that an RIP can outperform a state‑of‑the‑art deployed proof system.
The paper introduces EasyProver, a Lean theorem prover that uses recursive agents, isolated contexts, asynchronous search, parallel tactic probing, and an elastic elaboration service. It achieves near‑saturation results on several benchmark suites, proving 669/672 PutnamBench problems, all six IMO 2026 formalizations, 597/600 NTP4VC verification conditions, and all 189 VERINA tasks. Additionally, the authors present Aegis, a pipeline that transforms competitive programming problems into harder verification tasks by generating safe Rust solutions, translating them to Lean, and producing 2,045 Rust‑Lean program pairs with 11,533 candidate specifications, enabling new benchmarks for provers and reinforcement learning.
By Debargha Ganguly, Divya Raghunathan, Dejan Jovanovi\'c, Vikash Singh, Soonho Kong, Aaron Tomb, Aman Goel, Ferhat Erata, Sam Bayless
arXiv:2610.08319v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: In proof assistants such as Lean, a generated proof must pass machine compilation checks, so evaluation needs no human scoring. Direct generation fails...
By Hanchao Zhou, Jialei Li
The paper introduces the Infinity Machine, a self‑improving AI agent designed to solve research problems whose solutions can be programmatically verified. The system operates autonomously: it generates candidate solutions, verifies them, and audits the results without human intervention, all within a sandboxed environment governed by a kernel‑enforced gate. In a six‑day experiment, the Infinity Machine achieved four new state‑of‑the‑art results in quantum information and improved qubit‑routing and hardware efficiency, while also documenting several failure modes.
By Harish Santhanalakshmi Ganesan
arXiv:2607. 06341v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Formal verification offers the strongest guarantee of software correctness, but it does not scale: the proofs demanded by interactive theorem provers such as Coq require enormous expert effort.
By Shuangxiang Kan, Shuanglong Kan, Sebastian Ertel
arXiv:2606. 26057v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: AI agents are granted access to tools, APIs, and other infrastructure, making them active principals in those systems.
By Seth Dobrin, {\L}ukasz Chmiel
arXiv:2607. 12650v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Tool access alone does not make LLM empirical reasoning governable: accepted outputs need not descend from attested evidence, and accepted deductions need not hold up under formal scrutiny.
By Junyu Ren
arXiv:2607. 01223v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: When should an AI system's answer be trusted?
By Ben Slivinski, Michael Saldivar