MechAlign: Evaluating Semantic Alignment at the Project Level in Mathematical Formalization
Read the original on arXiv Computation and Language →The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computation and Language.
The Flow has not summarised this story yet — read it at arXiv Computation and Language.
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.
NL2AGBench is a benchmark that evaluates how well large language models can translate English geometry problems into the formal language required by AlphaGeometry’s theorem‑proving engine. The study tests ten state‑of‑the‑art LLMs, comparing executable translation accuracy, syntactic correctness, and error types, and finds a large gap between closed‑source and open‑source models. The authors also propose an error taxonomy and test mitigation strategies such as few‑shot prompting, fine‑tuning, and human‑guided hinting, which improve performance across model families.
arXiv:2608. 14221v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Autoformalization is commonly framed as translating natural-language mathematical statements into machine-verifiable formal languages such as Lean 4.
arXiv:2510. 04520v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: Accurate auto-formalization of theorem statements is essential for advancing automated discovery and verification of research-level mathematics, yet remains a major bottleneck for LLMs due to hallucinations, semantic mismatches, and their inability to synthesize new definitions.
LeanGraphSearch is a graph‑based retrieval method for the Lean 4 theorem prover that builds a dependency graph from Mathlib’s forward dependencies and traverses it to find supporting lemmas via multi‑hop chains. By linking each declaration to its premises, propagating relevance through a graph‑ranking algorithm, and re‑ranking candidates against the original query, it improves recall by up to 12% over LeanSearch v2 on MathlibQR and increases coverage of complete annotated proof routes on MathlibMPR by up to 3.7%. When integrated into an iterative proving loop, LeanGraphSearch raises pass rates at 8, 16, and 32 reflection turns by as much as 40% compared to a vanilla prover and up to 10% compared to LeanSearch v2, demonstrating higher accuracy‑cost efficiency.
arXiv:2606. 29493v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Benchmarks for LLM-assisted theorem proving in Lean are often treated as intrinsically reliable because every solved instance comes with a machine-checked proof.