Formal Mathematics Statement Curriculum Learning

Ranked by how close their title and abstract are to this paper’s. Select some to read them together.

Closest papers

1. Very close Not relevant

   FormalMATH: Benchmarking Formal Mathematical Reasoning of Large Language Models

   Zhouliang Yu, Ruotian Peng, Keyi Ding et al. · 2025 · Artificial Intelligence · preprint, not peer reviewed · cited 48 times · AI summary available

   Abstract

   Formal mathematical reasoning remains a critical challenge for artificial intelligence, hindered by limitations of existing benchmarks in scope and scale. To address this, we present FormalMATH, a large-scale Lean4 benchmark comprising 5,560 formally verified problems spanning from high-school Olympiad challenges to undergraduate-level theorems across diverse domains (e.g., algebra, applied mathematics, calculus, number theory, and discrete mathematics). To mitigate the inefficiency of manual formalization, we introduce a novel human-in-the-loop autoformalization pipeline that integrates: (1) specialized large language models (LLMs) for statement autoformalization, (2) multi-LLM semantic ver…

2. Close Cites this paper Not relevant

   Solving Formal Math Problems by Decomposition and Iterative Reflection

   Yichi Zhou, Jianqiu Zhao, Yong-Xin Zhang et al. · 2025 · arXiv.org · preprint, not peer reviewed · cited 43 times · Not summarized yet

   Abstract

   General-purpose Large Language Models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable success in intelligence, performing comparably to human experts on complex reasoning tasks such as coding and mathematical reasoning. However, generating formal proofs in specialized languages like Lean 4 remains a significant challenge for these models, limiting their application in complex theorem proving and automated verification. Current approaches typically require specializing models through fine-tuning on dedicated formal corpora, incurring high costs for data collection and training. In this work, we introduce \textbf{Delta Prover}, an agent-based framework that orchestrates the interaction between a general-purpo…

3. Close Not relevant

   Mathesis: Towards Formal Theorem Proving from Natural Languages

   Xue-Jun Yu, Jian-Yuan Zhong, Zi-Jin Feng et al. · 2025 · arXiv.org · preprint, not peer reviewed · cited 22 times · Not summarized yet

   Abstract

   Recent advances in large language models show strong promise for formal reasoning. However, most LLM-based theorem provers have long been constrained by the need for expert-written formal statements as inputs, limiting their applicability to real-world problems expressed in natural language. We tackle this gap with Mathesis, the first end-to-end theorem proving pipeline processing informal problem statements. It contributes Mathesis-Autoformalizer, the first autoformalizer using reinforcement learning to enhance the formalization ability of natural language problems, aided by our novel LeanScorer framework for nuanced formalization quality assessment. It also proposes a Mathesis-Prover, whic…

4. Close Not relevant

   Language Modeling for Formal Mathematics

   M. Rabe, Dennis Lee, Kshitij Bansal et al. · 2020 · arXiv.org · preprint, not peer reviewed · cited 2 times · Not summarized yet

   Abstract

   We examine whether language modeling applied to mathematical formulas enables logical reasoning. We suggest several logical reasoning tasks that can be used to evaluate language models trained on formal mathematical statements, such as type inference, suggesting missing assumptions and completing equalities. To train language models for formal mathematics, we propose a novel skip-tree task, which outperforms standard language modeling tasks on our reasoning benchmarks. We also analyze the models' ability to formulate new conjectures by measuring how often the predictions that do not fit the ground truth or any training data turn out to be true and useful statements.

5. Close Cites this paper Not relevant

   SubgoalXL: Subgoal-based Expert Learning for Theorem Proving

   Xue-Liang Zhao, Lin Zheng, Haige Bo et al. · 2024 · arXiv.org · preprint, not peer reviewed · cited 13 times · Not summarized yet

   Abstract

   Formal theorem proving, a field at the intersection of mathematics and computer science, has seen renewed interest with advancements in large language models (LLMs). This paper introduces SubgoalXL, a novel approach that synergizes subgoal-based proofs with expert learning to enhance LLMs' capabilities in formal theorem proving within the Isabelle environment. SubgoalXL addresses two critical challenges: the scarcity of specialized mathematics and theorem-proving data, and the need for improved multi-step reasoning abilities in LLMs. By optimizing data efficiency and employing subgoal-level supervision, SubgoalXL extracts richer information from limited human-generated proofs. The framework …

6. Close Cites this paper Not relevant

   STP: Self-play LLM Theorem Provers with Iterative Conjecturing and Proving

   Ke-Fan Dong, Teng-Yu Ma · 2025 · International Conference on Machine Learning · cited 91 times · Not summarized yet

   Abstract

   A fundamental challenge in formal theorem proving by LLMs is the lack of high-quality training data. Although reinforcement learning or expert iteration partially mitigates this issue by alternating between LLM generating proofs and finetuning them on correctly generated ones, performance quickly plateaus due to the scarcity of correct proofs (sparse rewards). To keep improving the models with limited data, we draw inspiration from mathematicians, who continuously develop new results, partly by proposing novel conjectures or exercises (which are often variants of known results) and attempting to solve them. We design the Self-play Theorem Prover (STP) that simultaneously takes on two roles, …

7. Close Cites this paper Not relevant

   Seed-Prover 1.5: Mastering Undergraduate-Level Theorem Proving via Learning from Experience

   Jiang-Jie Chen, Wen-Xiang Chen, Jia-Cheng Du et al. · 2025 · arXiv.org · preprint, not peer reviewed · cited 39 times · Not summarized yet

   Abstract

   Large language models have recently made significant progress to generate rigorous mathematical proofs. In contrast, utilizing LLMs for theorem proving in formal languages (such as Lean) remains challenging and computationally expensive, particularly when addressing problems at the undergraduate level and beyond. In this work, we present \textbf{Seed-Prover 1.5}, a formal theorem-proving model trained via large-scale agentic reinforcement learning, alongside an efficient test-time scaling (TTS) workflow. Through extensive interactions with Lean and other tools, the model continuously accumulates experience during the RL process, substantially enhancing the capability and efficiency of formal…

8. Close Cites this paper Not relevant

   Learning to Disprove: Formal Counterexample Generation with Large Language Models

   Ze-Nan Li, Zhaoyu Li, Kaiyu Yang et al. · 2026 · arXiv.org · preprint, not peer reviewed · cited 4 times · Not summarized yet

   Abstract

   Mathematical reasoning demands two critical, complementary skills: constructing rigorous proofs for true statements and discovering counterexamples that disprove false ones. However, current AI efforts in mathematics focus almost exclusively on proof construction, often neglecting the equally important task of finding counterexamples. In this paper, we address this gap by fine-tuning large language models (LLMs) to reason about and generate counterexamples. We formalize this task as formal counterexample generation, which requires LLMs not only to propose candidate counterexamples but also to produce formal proofs that can be automatically verified in the Lean 4 theorem prover. To enable eff…

Prior work it builds on

1. Close Used in depth by this paper A method it uses Not relevant

   Generative Language Modeling for Automated Theorem Proving

   Stanislas Polu, I. Sutskever · 2020 · arXiv.org · preprint, not peer reviewed · cited 526 times · Not summarized yet

   Abstract

   We explore the application of transformer-based language models to automated theorem proving. This work is motivated by the possibility that a major limitation of automated theorem provers compared to humans -- the generation of original mathematical terms -- might be addressable via generation from language models. We present an automated prover and proof assistant, GPT-f, for the Metamath formalization language, and analyze its performance. GPT-f found new short proofs that were accepted into the main Metamath library, which is to our knowledge, the first time a deep-learning based system has contributed proofs that were adopted by a formal mathematics community.

2. Close Used in depth by this paper A method it uses Not relevant

   Proof Artifact Co-training for Theorem Proving with Language Models

   Jesse Michael Han, Jason M. Rute, Yu-Huai Wu et al. · 2021 · International Conference on Learning Representations · cited 183 times · Not summarized yet

   Abstract

   Labeled data for imitation learning of theorem proving in large libraries of formalized mathematics is scarce as such libraries require years of concentrated effort by human specialists to be built. This is particularly challenging when applying large Transformer language models to tactic prediction, because the scaling of performance with respect to model size is quickly disrupted in the data-scarce, easily-overfitted regime. We propose PACT ({\bf P}roof {\bf A}rtifact {\bf C}o-{\bf T}raining), a general methodology for extracting abundant self-supervised data from kernel-level proof terms for co-training alongside the usual tactic prediction objective. We apply this methodology to Lean, an…

3. Close Not relevant

   Autoformalization with Large Language Models

   Yu-Huai Wu, Albert Qiaochu Jiang, Wen-Da Li et al. · 2022 · Neural Information Processing Systems · cited 386 times · Not summarized yet

   Abstract

   Autoformalization is the process of automatically translating from natural language mathematics to formal specifications and proofs. A successful autoformalization system could advance the fields of formal verification, program synthesis, and artificial intelligence. While the long-term goal of autoformalization seemed elusive for a long time, we show large language models provide new prospects towards this goal. We make the surprising observation that LLMs can correctly translate a significant portion ($25.3\%$) of mathematical competition problems perfectly to formal specifications in Isabelle/HOL. We demonstrate the usefulness of this process by improving a previously introduced neural th…

4. Close A method it uses Not relevant

   MiniF2F: a cross-system benchmark for formal Olympiad-level mathematics

   Kunhao Zheng, Jesse Michael Han, Stanislas Polu · 2021 · International Conference on Learning Representations · cited 507 times · Not summarized yet

   Abstract

   We present miniF2F, a dataset of formal Olympiad-level mathematics problems statements intended to provide a unified cross-system benchmark for neural theorem proving. The miniF2F benchmark currently targets Metamath, Lean, Isabelle (partially) and HOL Light (partially) and consists of 488 problem statements drawn from the AIME, AMC, and the International Mathematical Olympiad (IMO), as well as material from high-school and undergraduate mathematics courses. We report baseline results using GPT-f, a neural theorem prover based on GPT-3 and provide an analysis of its performance. We intend for miniF2F to be a community-driven effort and hope that our benchmark will help spur advances in neura…

5. Close Not relevant

   Learning to Prove Theorems via Interacting with Proof Assistants

   Kaiyu Yang, Jia Deng · 2019 · International Conference on Machine Learning · cited 200 times · Not summarized yet

   Abstract

   Humans prove theorems by relying on substantial high-level reasoning and problem-specific insights. Proof assistants offer a formalism that resembles human mathematical reasoning, representing theorems in higher-order logic and proofs as high-level tactics. However, human experts have to construct proofs manually by entering tactics into the proof assistant. In this paper, we study the problem of using machine learning to automate the interaction with proof assistants. We construct CoqGym, a large-scale dataset and learning environment containing 71K human-written proofs from 123 projects developed with the Coq proof assistant. We develop ASTactic, a deep learning-based model that generates …

Papers that cite it

1. Close Uses this paper in depth Not relevant

   Draft, Sketch, and Prove: Guiding Formal Theorem Provers with Informal Proofs

   Albert Qiaochu Jiang, S. Welleck, Jin-Peng Zhou et al. · 2022 · International Conference on Learning Representations · cited 396 times · Not summarized yet

   Abstract

   The formalization of existing mathematical proofs is a notoriously difficult process. Despite decades of research on automation and proof assistants, writing formal proofs remains arduous and only accessible to a few experts. While previous studies to automate formalization focused on powerful search algorithms, no attempts were made to take advantage of available informal proofs. In this work, we introduce Draft, Sketch, and Prove (DSP), a method that maps informal proofs to formal proof sketches, and uses the sketches to guide an automated prover by directing its search to easier sub-problems. We investigate two relevant setups where informal proofs are either written by humans or generate…

2. Close* Uses this paper in depth Not relevant

   InternLM2.5-StepProver: Advancing Automated Theorem Proving via Expert Iteration on Large-Scale LEAN Problems

   Zi-Jian Wu, Suozhi Huang, Zhejian Zhou et al. · 2024 · arXiv.org · preprint, not peer reviewed · cited 90 times · Not summarized yet
3. Close Uses this paper in depth Not relevant

   GAR: Generative Adversarial Reinforcement Learning for Formal Theorem Proving

   Rui-Da Wang, Jiarui Yao, Rui Pan et al. · 2025 · International Conference on Learning Representations · cited 8 times · Not summarized yet

   Abstract

   Solving math problems through verifiable languages such as Lean has significantly impacted both the mathematics and computer science communities. Current state-of-the-art models are often trained with expensive online Reinforcement Learning (RL) or expert iteration. However, these approaches rely on fixed problem sets, which causes inefficient training and limits the model to tackle complex problems. To overcome these limitations, we propose **GAR**: *Generative Adversarial Reinforcement learning*, a comprehensive RL training framework that jointly trains the problem composer and solver in an adversarial loop. **GAR** introduces an implicit curriculum learning mechanism, which aligns task di…

4. Close Uses this paper in depth Not relevant

   Lean-STaR: Learning to Interleave Thinking and Proving

   Haohan Lin, Zhiqing Sun, Yiming Yang et al. · 2024 · Artificial Intelligence · cited 81 times · AI summary available

   Abstract

   Traditional language model-based theorem proving assumes that by training on a sufficient amount of formal proof data, a model will learn to prove theorems. Our key observation is that a wealth of informal information that is not present in formal proofs can be useful for learning to prove theorems. For instance, humans think through steps of a proof, but this thought process is not visible in the resulting code. We present Lean-STaR, a framework for training language models to produce informal thoughts prior to each step of a proof, thereby boosting the model's theorem-proving capabilities. Lean-STaR uses retrospective ground-truth tactics to generate synthetic thoughts for training the lan…

5. Close Uses this paper in depth Not relevant

   MA-LoT: Model-Collaboration Lean-based Long Chain-of-Thought Reasoning enhances Formal Theorem Proving

   Rui-Da Wang, Rui Pan, Yuxin Li et al. · 2025 · International Conference on Machine Learning · cited 21 times · Not summarized yet

   Abstract

   Solving mathematical problems using computer-verifiable languages like Lean has significantly impacted the mathematical and computer science communities. State-of-the-art methods utilize a single Large Language Model (LLM) to generate complete proof or perform tree search, but they fail to balance these tasks. We propose **MA-LoT**: *Model-CollAboration Lean-based Long Chain-of-Thought*, a comprehensive framework for Lean4 theorem proving to solve this issue. It separates the cognition tasks of general NL for whole-proof generation and error analysis for proof correction using the model-collaboration method. We achieve this by structured interaction of the LLM and Lean4 verifier in Long CoT.…