The paper investigates how verifier feedback influences self‑repair in formal theorem proving. Using controlled one‑step experiments on Lean with frozen Qwen3.6‑27B and DeepSeek‑Prover‑V2‑7B, the authors find that showing a model its failed predecessor can hurt success and increase copying, while providing the corresponding compiler error can partially recover performance. In sequential trials, Qwen benefits from correct diagnostics within failed‑proof histories, but no feedback condition outperforms simple instruction‑only resampling, indicating that verifier feedback can aid repair yet cannot fully offset the cost of conditioning on a failed attempt.
By Jack Li, Sophia Li
arXiv:2606. 03743v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: While Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown strong performance in generating formal proofs, their outputs often remain less readable, modular, maintainable, and reusable than proofs in mature formal mathematics libraries.
By Yiming Fu, Peixuan Liu, Zichen Wang, Kun yuan
The paper introduces a reference‑free proxy‑judge framework for autoformalization, separating correctness into grounding, statement faithfulness, coverage, and inference. It presents three theoretical results linking proxy error rates to pass‑but‑wrong rates, the impact of false rejections on refinement, and a decomposition of final pass rates. The framework is instantiated with eight proxies and evaluated on ProofNet, miniF2F, e‑SNLI, and ProntoQA, showing that the predictions hold and identifying failure routes.
By Lei Xu, Xin Quan, Andr\'e Freitas
arXiv:2610.38174v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: We present EasyProver, a Lean proving system built from recursive agents with isolated contexts, asynchronous search, parallel tactic probing, and an...
By Debargha Ganguly, Divya Raghunathan, Dejan Jovanovi\'c, Vikash Singh, Soonho Kong, Aaron Tomb, Aman Goel, Ferhat Erata, Sam Bayless
arXiv:2608. 09277v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Verified code generation asks a large language model (LLM) to generate both an executable program and a machine-checkable proof that the program meets a formal specification, promising software that is correct by construction.
By Zenan Li, Ziran Yang, Peiyang Song, Zhaoyu Li, Kaiyu Yang
arXiv:2607. 09366v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Program verification is crucial for software correctness, but producing fully verified programs remains difficult in practice.
By Shirley Yu, Ruben Martins