Formal proofs in Lean 4 that pass the kernel's type checker can nonetheless vary widely in quality. We introduce ProofJudge, an agentic LLM-as-judge system that scores formal proof quality along five...
arXiv:2602.18307v2 Announce Type: replace-cross
Abstract: Large language models have achieved striking results in interactive theorem proving, particularly in Lean. However, most benchmarks for LLM-b...
By Yutong Xin, Qiaochu Chen, Greg Durrett, I\c{s}il Dillig
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:2610.17358v1 Announce Type: cross
Abstract: Formal verification proves that a program satisfies its specification, but says nothing about whether the specification captures what the author mean...
By Martin Amster, One An, Holly Baker, Fernanda Graciolli, Simon Henniger, Nada Amin
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.
By Pawan Sasanka Ammanamanchi, Siddharth Bhat, Stella Biderman
arXiv:2609.10293v1 Announce Type: new
Abstract: In high-stakes domains such as legal practice, a language-model answer is only useful to the extent that a reader can verify each claim against the sou...
By Chen Qian, Yimeng Wang, Yu Chen, Lingfei Wu, Andreas Stathopoulos