arXiv Computation and Language By Xin Quan, Reto Gubelmann, Andr\'e Freitas

Autoformalizing Argumentative Material Inferences

Read the original on arXiv Computation and Language →

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.

Machine-generated by The Flow from the publisher's headline and feed description — not written or checked by a human. The full article lives at arXiv Computation and Language.

arXiv AI
Jun 2

Formally Solving Answer-Construction Problems in Lean

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.

By Jialiang Sun, Yuzhi Tang, Ao Li, Chris J. Maddison, Kuldeep S. Meel
arXiv AI
Jun 9

Artificial Intelligence for Mathematical Reasoning: An Integrated Survey of Language Models, Neuro-symbolic Systems, and Verified Discovery

arXiv:2606. 08728v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Mathematical reasoning has long served as a stringent test of machine intelligence; over the past decade, it has moved from a niche problem within NLP to one of the most consequential AI frontiers.

By Syed Rifat Raiyan, Mohsinul Kabir, Hasan Mahmud, Md Kamrul Hasan
arXiv AI
Jun 16

The Faithfulness Gap: Certifying Semantic Equivalence Between Natural-Language and Formal Mathematical Statements

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.

By Noor Islam S. Mohammad, Tamim Sheikh
arXiv AI
Aug 28

FaithSieve: Fine-Grained Evaluation of Math Proofs with Faithful Formal Evidence

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.

By Ziyu Wang, Qiming Dai, Yishan Wu, Zaiwen Wen
arXiv AI
Aug 28

ProofEvolve: Neuro-Symbolic Evolution for Formal Automated Theorem Proving

ProofEvolve is a neuro‑symbolic framework that evolves formally verified symbolic proof structures alongside neural models to expand the knowledge boundary in automated theorem proving. The neural component proposes variation operators such as decompositions, repairs, and schema recombinations, while the Lean kernel verifies every proof transition, ensuring formal soundness. Across three competition‑level Lean benchmarks, ProofEvolve achieves the highest average solve rate among evaluated proof systems.

By Wenqian Ye, Ziwei Guan, Eric Xie, Bohan Liu, Shivani Modi, Buyun Zhang, Ellie Dingqiao Wen, Henry Kautz, Aidong Zhang