arXiv:2606. 13925v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models can often close proof gaps in interactive theorem provers, but a verified theorem is not the same thing as a reusable library contribution.
Summary generated by The Flow from the publisher's feed. The full article lives at arXiv AI.
arXiv:2607. 13292v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Autoformalization translates informal natural language into formal, machine-verifiable languages.
arXiv:2606. 31134v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: While Large Language Models (LLMs) have demonstrated exceptional capabilities in mathematical reasoning, they frequently produce subtle errors that evade human detection.
arXiv:2606. 09674v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: We present Trellis: an autoformalization system that leverages LLM agents in a deterministically constrained workflow to enforce incremental progress in Lean autoformalization tasks through iterative refinement of natural language proofs.
arXiv:2605. 20531v2 Announce Type: replace-cross Abstract: Reliable verification of proofs remains a bottleneck for training and evaluating AI systems on hard mathematical reasoning.
arXiv:2607. 06341v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Formal verification offers the strongest guarantee of software correctness, but it does not scale: the proofs demanded by interactive theorem provers such as Coq require enormous expert effort.
Formal verification offers the strongest guarantee of software correctness, but it does not scale: the proofs demanded by interactive theorem provers such as Coq require enormous expert effort. Large language models (LLMs) promise to generate these proofs automatically, yet existing approaches wire a fixed, human-designed proof strategy into the system and constrain the model to follow it (retrieving premises and predicting tactics one step at a time, or splitting goals by divide-and-conquer), and still prove only a fraction of their target theorems.