Automated Conjecture Resolution with Formal Verification

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2604.03789v1
• Date: Sat, 04 Apr 2026 16:35:16 GMT
• Title: Automated Conjecture Resolution with Formal Verification
• Abstract summary: We propose an automated framework for tackling research-level mathematical problems.<n>Our framework consists of two components: an informal reasoning agent, Rethlas, and a formal verification agent, Archon.<n>Using this framework, we automatically resolve an open problem in commutative algebra and formally verify the resulting proof in Lean 4 with essentially no human involvement.
• Score: 21.763678203045973
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Recent advances in large language models have significantly improved their ability to perform mathematical reasoning, extending from elementary problem solving to increasingly capable performance on research-level problems. However, reliably solving and verifying such problems remains challenging due to the inherent ambiguity of natural language reasoning. In this paper, we propose an automated framework for tackling research-level mathematical problems that integrates natural language reasoning with formal verification, enabling end-to-end problem solving with minimal human intervention. Our framework consists of two components: an informal reasoning agent, Rethlas, and a formal verification agent, Archon. Rethlas mimics the workflow of human mathematicians by combining reasoning primitives with our theorem search engine, Matlas, to explore solution strategies and construct candidate proofs. Archon, equipped with our formal theorem search engine LeanSearch, translates informal arguments into formalized Lean 4 projects through structured task decomposition, iterative refinement, and automated proof synthesis, ensuring machine-checkable correctness. Using this framework, we automatically resolve an open problem in commutative algebra and formally verify the resulting proof in Lean 4 with essentially no human involvement. Our experiments demonstrate that strong theorem retrieval tools enable the discovery and application of cross-domain mathematical techniques, while the formal agent is capable of autonomously filling nontrivial gaps in informal arguments. More broadly, our work illustrates a promising paradigm for mathematical research in which informal and formal reasoning systems, equipped with theorem retrieval tools, operate in tandem to produce verifiable results, substantially reduce human effort, and offer a concrete instantiation of human-AI collaborative mathematical research.

Related papers

• MathCoPilot: An Interactive System for Human-AI Symbiotic Paradigm of Mathematical Research [62.221184989046826]
  MathCoPilot is a human-in-the-loop system that embodies a new human--AI symbiotic paradigm for mathematical research.<n>MathCoPilot unifies three core capabilities: an interactive proof blueprint that decomposes a proof into navigable steps the human can directly inspect, direct, and refine; automated proving skill orchestration with adaptive knowledge base search and Lean-integrated iterative verification; and topic-driven paper retrieval and automated formalization into a verified Lean knowledge base.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-16T05:22:40Z)
• From Solvers to Research: Large Language Model-Driven Formal Mathematics at the Research Frontier [109.93387172162984]
  We argue that the next leap in AI4Math systems requires a decisive shift from predefined problem-solvers to research agents.<n>We provide a systematic review of the field, covering datasets, auto-formalization, and proof synthesis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-07-08T17:46:36Z)
• Artificial Intelligence for Mathematical Reasoning: An Integrated Survey of Language Models, Neuro-symbolic Systems, and Verified Discovery [3.9943798586374784]
  This survey provides a unified account of the field's evolution.<n>We organize the landscape along four axes: (i) informal reasoning over text and diagrams, spanning MWP solving, multimodal geometry, and RLMs; (ii) formal reasoning in proof assistants, including autoformalization, tactic prediction, compiler-guided repair, and proof search; (iii) mathematical discovery, where systems propose constructions, improve bounds, or assist attacks on open problems; and (iv) the inference and training-time techniques, including CoT prompting, tool use, process reward models, and VLVR, that increasingly connect generation with
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-06-07T16:50:07Z)
• Formal Conjectures: An Open and Evolving Benchmark for Verified Discovery in Mathematics [9.38309744591661]
  We present Formal Conjectures, an evolving benchmark of 2615 mathematical problem statements formalized in Lean 4.<n>The dataset features 1029 open research conjectures providing a zero-contamination benchmark for mathematical proof discovery.<n>We describe our approach to ensuring the correctness of these formalizations in a collaborative open-source project where contributions stem from an active community.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-05-13T08:33:15Z)
• Towards Autonomous Mathematics Research [48.29504087871558]
  We introduce Aletheia, a math research agent that iteratively generates, verifies, and revises solutions end-to-end in natural language.<n>Specifically, Aletheia is powered by an advanced version of Gemini Deep Think for challenging reasoning problems.<n>We demonstrate Aletheia from Olympiad problems to PhD-level exercises and most notably, through several distinct milestones in AI-assisted mathematics research.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-02-10T18:50:15Z)
• Advancing Mathematical Research via Human-AI Interactive Theorem Proving [16.40852561664514]
  We propose a human-in-the-loop workflow for interactive theorem proving and discovery with LLMs.<n>Human experts retain control over problem formulation and admissible assumptions, while the model searches for proofs or contradictions.<n>We instantiate this workflow in a case study on the connection between manifold optimization and Grover's quantum search algorithm.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-12-10T09:16:27Z)
• IndiMathBench: Autoformalizing Mathematical Reasoning Problems with a Human Touch [8.80477323574638]
  We introduce IndiMathBench, a human-verified benchmark designed to evaluate mathematical theorem proving.<n>IndiMathBench is composed of 312 formal Lean 4 theorems paired with their corresponding informal problem statements, sourced from Indian Mathematics Olympiads.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-11-30T17:40:13Z)
• FormalMATH: Benchmarking Formal Mathematical Reasoning of Large Language Models [17.919212265668783]
  We present FormalMATH, a large-scale Lean4 benchmark comprising 5,560 formally verified problems spanning from high-school Olympiad challenges to undergraduate-level theorems.<n>We introduce a novel human-in-the-loop autoformalization pipeline that integrates statement autoformalization, semantic verification, and negation-based disproof filtering strategies.<n>Our evaluation of state-of-the-art LLM-based theorem provers reveals significant limitations.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-05-05T15:37:00Z)
• Why Reasoning Matters? A Survey of Advancements in Multimodal Reasoning (v1) [66.51642638034822]
  Reasoning is central to human intelligence, enabling structured problem-solving across diverse tasks.<n>Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have greatly enhanced their reasoning abilities in arithmetic, commonsense, and symbolic domains.<n>This paper offers a concise yet insightful overview of reasoning techniques in both textual and multimodal LLMs.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-04-04T04:04:56Z)
• Formal Mathematical Reasoning: A New Frontier in AI [60.26950681543385]
  We advocate for formal mathematical reasoning and argue that it is indispensable for advancing AI4Math to the next level.<n>We summarize existing progress, discuss open challenges, and envision critical milestones to measure future success.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-12-20T17:19:24Z)
• Mathematical Formalized Problem Solving and Theorem Proving in Different Fields in Lean 4 [0.0]
  This paper explores the use of Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate formal proof steps and complete formalized proofs. The goal is to determine how AI can be leveraged to assist the mathematical formalization process and improve its performance.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-09-09T18:21:28Z)
• A Hybrid System for Systematic Generalization in Simple Arithmetic Problems [70.91780996370326]
  We propose a hybrid system capable of solving arithmetic problems that require compositional and systematic reasoning over sequences of symbols. We show that the proposed system can accurately solve nested arithmetical expressions even when trained only on a subset including the simplest cases.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-29T18:35:41Z)
• UniGeo: Unifying Geometry Logical Reasoning via Reformulating Mathematical Expression [127.68780714438103]
  Two main geometry problems: calculation and proving, are usually treated as two specific tasks. We construct a large-scale Unified Geometry problem benchmark, UniGeo, which contains 4,998 calculation problems and 9,543 proving problems. We also present a unified multi-task Geometric Transformer framework, Geoformer, to tackle calculation and proving problems simultaneously.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-12-06T04:37:51Z)
• Formal Mathematics Statement Curriculum Learning [64.45821687940946]
  We show that at same compute budget, expert iteration, by which we mean proof search interleaved with learning, dramatically outperforms proof search only. We also observe that when applied to a collection of formal statements of sufficiently varied difficulty, expert iteration is capable of finding and solving a curriculum of increasingly difficult problems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-02-03T00:17:00Z)

This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.

This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.