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.
arXiv:2606. 31002v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Theorem-proving benchmarks evaluate proof search against fixed formal statements, but natural-language-to-Lean formalization must generate the formal statement itself.
arXiv:2607. 01223v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: When should an AI system's answer be trusted?
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.
CausalSmith is a framework that automates theoretical research in causal inference by integrating a Lean proof assistant with a self‑improving agentic pipeline. It uses Causalean, a Lean library of over 7,000 machine‑checked declarations, and a pipeline that selects topics, proposes results, formalizes statements, constructs proofs, and audits them against informal claims. The system’s artifacts and source code are publicly available on GitHub.
The paper "SoK: Formal Methods for Fact-Checking and Information Integrity" discusses how automated fact‑checking systems typically output a verdict but lack a detailed record—called a warrant—explaining the evidence and conditions behind that verdict. It proposes organizing the field by what is being formalised—claims, reasoning, checking systems, ecosystems, and regulatory obligations—rather than by pipeline stages, and surveys 121 works to identify gaps, notably the scarcity of formal methods applied to verifying the checking systems themselves. The authors highlight that existing formal tools, though largely unused in this domain, could address these gaps and outline open problems with suggested first steps.
arXiv:2607. 22511v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Automating theoretical research is constrained not only by the generation of candidate results, but also by their reliable evaluation.
arXiv:2606. 29493v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Benchmarks for LLM-assisted theorem proving in Lean are often treated as intrinsically reliable because every solved instance comes with a machine-checked proof.
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:2608. 15432v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In formal verification, both the autoformalization of statements and automated proof search have been studied extensively.
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...
arXiv:2609.10293v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In high-stakes domains such as legal practice, a language-model answer is only useful to the extent that a reader can verify each claim against the sou...