We introduce TCS-Bench, a benchmark for evaluating Large Language Models (LLMs) on research-level Theoretical Computer Science (TCS) proof generation. TCS-Bench consists of theorem-proving tasks from papers published at top theoretical computer science venues (STOC, FOCS, and SODA).
arXiv:2608. 20153v1 Announce Type: new Abstract: Large language models (LLMs) have shown growing potential for automated theoretical computer science (TCS) research, yet existing benchmarks remain far from realistic research settings.
By Dingzirui Wang, Xuanliang Zhang, Keyan Xu, Qingfu Zhu, Wanxiang Che
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.
By Slim Barkallah, Luke Bailey, Kaiyue Wen, Mohammed Abouzaid, Tengyu Ma
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.
By Jierui Zhang, Siyuan Tan, Xinhang Li, Longzhuangzhi Lin, Dailin Li, Chengfeng Gu, Xinping Li, Yaxian Hao, Shengjia Liang, Yuxiang Ren, Wenhao Liu
arXiv:2602.02377v3 Announce Type: replace
Abstract: While large language models (LLMs) have achieved strong performance on mathematical problems with verifiable answers, many advanced problems are pr...
By Haotong Yang, Zitong Wang, Shijia Kang, Siqi Yang, Wenkai Yu, Xu Niu, Yike Sun, Yi Hu, Zhouchen Lin, Muhan Zhang
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