arXiv Computation and Language
MathAdv: What Theorem Provers Know, Reason, Formalize, and Generalize
Read the original on arXiv Computation and Language →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computation and Language.
Related stories
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jun 8
TheoremBench: Evaluating LLMs on Theorem Proving in Formal Mathematics
LLMs have recently achieved strong results on formal proving benchmarks. However, existing evaluations remain heavily concentrated on competition-style problems and often fail to capture how models behave on longer, more dependency-rich mathematical developments.
arXiv AI
Jun 15
MA-ProofBench: A Two-Tiered Evaluation of LLMs for Theorem Proving in Mathematical Analysis
arXiv:2606. 13782v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large Language Models (LLMs) have made notable progress in automated theorem proving, yet existing formal benchmarks remain limited in both mathematical coverage and difficulty.
arXiv AI
Jun 9
TheoremBench: Evaluating LLMs on Theorem Proving in Formal Mathematics
arXiv:2606. 09450v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: LLMs have recently achieved strong results on formal proving benchmarks.
arXiv AI
Jul 17
MathCoPilot: An Interactive System for Human-AI Symbiotic Paradigm of Mathematical Research
arXiv:2607. 14582v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Existing LLM-based theorem provers have achieved impressive results on formal mathematics benchmarks, yet they remain confined to acting as autonomous agents that prove a stated proposition.
arXiv AI
Jun 16
Mask-Proof: An LLM-based Automated Data Curation Pipeline on Mathematical Proofs
arXiv:2606. 15258v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) are increasingly capable of mathematical problem solving and can even assist with research-level proofs, yet we still lack a scalable and reproducible way to measure step-level reasoning in long proofs across diverse sources.
Hugging Face Trending Papers
Jul 13
AdvancedMathBench: A Benchmark Suite for Advanced Mathematical Proof Generation and Verification
Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable performance on high-school and olympiad-style mathematics, yet their capabilities on advanced mathematics remain poorly understood. Existing benchmarks, however, fall short in both scope and evaluation granularity: they provide limited disciplinary coverage and often rely on final-answer correctness or coarse judgments, leaving the validity of the reasoning process inadequately assessed.