arXiv:2608. 11181v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: When a probabilistic predictor answers many conditional-probability queries, are its answers self-consistent, and can this be verified in polynomial time?
arXiv:2607. 03561v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: As AI models continue to develop powerful capabilities, it becomes critical that we are able to verify that their output is aligned with our intentions.
arXiv:2603. 25414v4 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: A prevailing assumption in machine learning is that model correctness must be enforced after the fact.
arXiv:2608. 16438v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: In a world where valuable artifacts are increasingly created, completed, or processed by LLMs, the central economic question is not only what the LLM can produce, but what \emph{value} remains in the inputs (i.
arXiv:2607. 15528v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Following Goldwasser, Rothblum, Shafer, and Yehudayoff, who defined a framework for interactive proofs of learning [ITCS'21], we initiate the study of non-interactive proofs of learning.
arXiv:2603. 18046v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: We present NanoZK, a zero-knowledge proof system for verifiable LLM inference: clients and third-party auditors check that a provider executed the advertised model on a committed input without learning weights or activations.
arXiv:2606. 26418v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: A non-agentic "oracle" AI that estimates probabilities of future events faces a self-reference problem: once its answer is learned and acted upon, it can change the very probability it was asked to report.
arXiv:2607. 14545v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Machine-learned predictions can speed up offline NP-hard optimization, but asking a predictor what to do amounts to asking it to solve the problem, and committing an unchecked prediction forfeits every worst-case guarantee.
arXiv:2603. 03538v4 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) using chain-of-thought reasoning have demonstrated great potential for solving complex reasoning and planning tasks.
arXiv:2607. 06407v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: The XAI community has studied a wide range of queries and scores for explaining predictions of ML models.
arXiv:2606. 12594v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Modern Lean theorem provers achieve strong performance only with substantial training and inference compute, driven in part by scarce verified proof data and the long reasoning traces of formal proof search, making both supervised fine-tuning (SFT) and sampling expensive.
arXiv:2607. 15459v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: A trained deep reinforcement learning policy is a black box, and we ask whether it can be made explainable by rewriting it as an executable logic program that reproduces its behaviour and that a person can read, a logic engine can run, and an optimizer can edit.
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.