Skip to content
Preprint

From Errors to Proofs: Minimal-Core-Guided Repair for Neuro-Symbolic Constraint Solving

Aug 2026 · 0 citations · 17 references
Computer Science Mathematics

TL;DR

On a new benchmark of 77 problems with an exact oracle, translation to Answer Set Programming is faithful on six of seven domains and fails only on aggregate coverage scheduling, which concentrates the translation tax in one diagnosable pattern.

Abstract

Making language models solve constraint problems reliably often means having them translate the problem into a formal specification and delegating the search to a sound solver. But the translation is itself a language-model task, and an unfaithful translation makes the solver faithfully solve the wrong problem. Existing pipelines repair only translations that crash, returning the solver's error message and falling silent when the program runs but is wrong. We replace the error message with a proof: when the generated program is unsatisfiable, we extract a minimal unsatisfiable core over the model's own constraints and hand it back the exact set that cannot hold together, a leakage-free signal that localizes the fault. On a new benchmark of 77 problems with an exact oracle, translation to Answer Set Programming is faithful on six of seven domains and fails only on aggregate coverage scheduling, which concentrates the translation tax in one diagnosable pattern. A minimal core, rather than a bare error, is what stops a weaker model from fabricating solutions to infeasible problems, cutting fabrication from 79% to 7%. A strong chain-of-thought baseline meanwhile matches the symbolic route on accuracy, so the route's value is not accuracy but certificates and its refusal to fabricate.

View source

Similar papers

Jul 2026

Foundational Constraint Solving for Expressive Refinement Typing

FLEX is presented, a foundational Constrained Horn Clause (CHC) solver implemented in LEAN, that reduces the trusted base to the kernel alone, and allows using LEAN's entire proof ecosystem to verify low-level systems code, via three contributions.

J. Khan, Petros Markopoulos, Nicolás Lehmann et al. · 0 citations
Jul 2026

AoA: Theorem Proving Agent over Abstract Syntax Tree of Redesigned Language

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. · 0 citations
Conference 2026

From Literals to Atomic Constraints: Generalising Conflict-Driven Clause Learning for Constraint Programming

This work presents the first systematic analysis of how leading LCG solvers maintain their SAT encodings, based on source-code inspection and developer correspondence, and proposes a native CDCL framework for CP, replacing SAT literals with atomic constraints, enabling conflict analysis, nogood learning, and nogood pro...

Imko Marijnissen, Maarten Flippo, Emir Demirovi'c · 0 citations

Beyond Compilation: Evaluating Faithful Natural-Language-to-Lean Statement Formalization

This work uses a full $2^3$ factorial design to decompose three recurring interventions in formalization pipelines: parametric expert drafting, Mathlib/context search, and Lean elaboration feedback, suggesting that formal validity, proof-oriented Lean competence, and faithful statement generation should be reported sep...

Ke Zhang, P. Gallardo, S. Murthy et al. · 1 citation
Preprint Aug 2026

P$^{3}$: Joint Program-and-Proof Planning for Verified Code Generation

Verified code generation asks a large language model (LLM) to generate both an executable program and a machine-checkable proof that the program meets a formal specification, promising software that is correct by construction. The de facto workflow decouples the two halves of the problem: first synthesize a program, th...

Ze-Nan Li, Ziran Yang, Peiyang Song et al. · 0 citations
Jul 2026

When is LLM-Based Program Reasoning Correct? A Completion Semantics for LLM-Based Code Inference

The results show that witness generation effectively distinguishes inferences supported by plausible completions from those requiring unrealistic assumptions, providing a practical mechanism for validating reasoning over incomplete programs.

Zhiyuan Liu, Yihe Li, Trevor E. Carlson et al. · 0 citations

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.