Explanations, Prompts, and Formalizations: Arguments for New Norms in LLM-Enabled Mathematical Research
Read the original on arXiv Machine Learning →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Machine Learning.
The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Machine Learning.
arXiv:2607. 28632v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Major mathematical conjectures still depend heavily on expert intuition, so a unified method for the systematic generation and validation of conjectures with substantial mathematical potential remains unavailable.
arXiv:2607. 17388v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: We investigate the capacity of current language models to contribute to mathematical research.
MathAdv is a diagnostic benchmark for formal theorem proving that covers 13 undergraduate- and graduate-level mathematics domains. It includes Lean 4 proofs and up to three auxiliary tasks—multiple-choice questions, fill-in-the-blank problems, and expert-crafted transformations—to probe knowledge, informal reasoning, and robustness to problem presentation. Evaluation of current theorem provers shows formalization is a major bottleneck, performance varies by domain, natural-language guidance can help or hinder models, and equivalent reformulations reveal significant robustness gaps.
arXiv:2606. 10799v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) struggle to rigorously verify complex mathematical proofs.
arXiv:2606. 14838v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: How to define a good explanation is a long-standing philosophical debate which has found recent renewed interest in the context of AI outputs.
arXiv:2606. 28615v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed in high-stakes domains, where free-text explanations such as chain-of-thought and post-hoc rationales are used to justify model outputs.