Pistis is introduced, an agentic, oracle-guided proof search that produces formal Lean proofs that satisfy faithfulness conditions and can accept or refute natural language proofs written by humans or AI, demonstrating that faithful formalization is useful as a proof-checking tool.
Abstract
In formal verification, both the autoformalization of statements and automated proof search have been studied extensively. While automated proof search can produce a formal proof that compiles, the generated proof does not necessarily reflect how the natural-language argument arrives at its conclusion--a property we refer to as faithfulness. With faithfully formalized proofs, one can check the reasoning behind a human- or AI-written argument, and assist mathematicians in formalizing their proof sketches. However, it is particularly challenging due to misalignment of formal proof tactics and natural language reasoning. In this work, we rigorously describe a set of five necessary conditions a faithful formal proof must satisfy, and introduce Pistis, an agentic, oracle-guided proof search that produces formal Lean proofs that satisfy them. At its core is a novel faithfulness-preserving divide-and-conquer search, which we name OrderDecompose, that tracks citation dependencies and blocks unfaithful shortcuts, paired with a refutation search, that surfaces gaps and errors in the natural language proof source. OrderDecompose completes proofs that baselines cannot close even within a 12-hour budget, and its artifacts compile over 33$\times$ as fast as prior work's. We apply Pistis on the first three books of Euclid's Elements, producing high-quality artifacts containing faithful formal proofs. Under a blinded human study and an LLM-as-a-judge protocol on rigorous rubrics, Pistis-generated proofs are favored over prior works--2.89$\times$ and 5.2$\times$ as often by human reviewers and the LLM judge, respectively. It further uncovers gaps in Euclid's proofs and their translation, and can accept or refute natural language proofs written by humans or AI, demonstrating that faithful formalization is useful as a proof-checking tool.
FaithSieve is introduced, a Lean-assisted framework for fine-grained evaluation of natural-language mathematical proofs that demonstrates that decomposing proofs into fine-grained units and grounding them with faithful formal evidence significantly improves reliable evaluation of natural-language reasoning.
Zi-Yu Wang, Qi-Yu Dai, Yi-Shan Wu et al.· 0 citations
A sound translation from Tamarin to ProVerif is presented that enables a rigorous comparison of the two tools and introduces techniques for formula rewriting, encoding multiset rewrite semantics, and handling simultaneous events, supporting a large subset of Tamarin's features, including multiset rewrite rules, lemmas,...
Kevin Morio, Yavor Ivanov, R. Künnemann· 0 citations
It is shown that imposing a fixed, human-designed proof strategy into the system and constrain the model to follow it is unnecessary and limiting, and a state-of-the-art model can write proofs for verified software development fully and automatically.
Shuangxiang Kan, Shuanglong Kan, Sebastian Ertel· 0 citations
This work gives the first foundational treatment of proof repair, focusing in particular on type-theoretic proof repair in response to changes in datatypes, and formalizes and proves that the core component of this proof repair algorithm—a “configuration”—is exactly an algebra isomorphism.
E. G. Plante, Eric Paul, G. A. Kavvos· 0 citations
ToMap is introduced, a multi-agent framework that structures proof autoformalization as a Decomposer-Formalizer-Prover pipeline with efficient test-time optimization guided by formal verification and semantic rubrics for proof quality.
AoA lifts the agent off source text and onto the abstract syntax tree (AST): the model supplies proofs as JSON representations of Minilang's AST and drives the prover through a tree-edit model that fuses proof operations and states into one proof tree, so each operation carries its own subgoal's state, readable directl...
Qiyuan Xu, Joshua Ong Jun Leang, Renxi Wang et al.· arXiv.org· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.