This paper introduces Magenta, a training-free agentic pipeline that, given only a natural-language problem, produces an answer, expresses it as a Lean 4 statement, and constructs a machine-checked proof, which achieves 100% accuracy across all evaluated olympiad benchmarks.
Abstract
Most of mathematical knowledge has been communicated through so-called informal use of mathematics and natural language. With large language models (LLMs) being highly adept in using natural language, they achieve strong performance, yet not perfect, in informal mathematical reasoning. Restraining LLMs to informal reasoning misses out on the opportunity to use the discrete verification abilities that machines offer through machine-checkable proofs. In this paper, we bridge the gap between informal and formal reasoning by integrating Lean signals into the informal reasoning process. We introduce Magenta, a training-free agentic pipeline that, given only a natural-language problem, produces an answer, expresses it as a Lean 4 statement, and constructs a machine-checked proof. A statement judge verifies whether the formalisation preserves the original problem, while an error-attribution judge routes failed attempts either to mathematical re-derivation or local Lean repair. Magenta achieves 100% accuracy across all evaluated olympiad benchmarks, including AIME 2025, AIME 2026, and HMMT February 2026. When paired with the open-weight K2-Horizon-7B reasoner, it solves all six IMO 2026 problems. Our analysis shows that statement adjudication is essential for preventing false certificates and that feedback-guided correction outperforms independent resampling on difficult problems.
Large language models are increasingly used as collaborators on deductive-reasoning tasks, but their outputs can hallucinate or pull users away from intended reasoning. Formal proof assistants provide machine-checked verification, but have a steep learning curve and require more granular reasoning than human written pr...
Chen-Jun Guo, Manooshree Patel, Arnav Mehta et al.· 0 citations
Large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated great potential in code reasoning tasks, but their reasoning processes lack reliable verification mechanisms, making it difficult to ensure logical correctness. The Tree of Thoughts (ToT) framework improves reasoning by exploring multiple paths and employing backtracking,...
Hao-Liang Cheng, En-Yi Tang, Shuo-Xiao Zhang et al.· Proceedings of the ACM on So...· 0 citations
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
ProofGap is a fine-grained benchmark for step-level formal reasoning constructed through a natural-language proof-processing pipeline that decomposes each reasoning step into one or more aligned proof gaps, enabling more precise localization of model failures.
Li-Han Xie, Zhi-Cheng Hui, Ying-Jun Lan et al.· 0 citations
Recent progress in large language model reasoning has been driven by benchmarks and reinforcement learning environments with automatically verifiable rewards, particularly in mathematics, code, and formal logic. These settings make model accuracy easier to evaluate and optimize, but it remains unclear how far success u...
Ibrahim Ethem Deveci, Funda Tan Çalık, Barış Deniz Sağlam et al.· 0 citations
S PRING uses SMT solver as a training-time verifier of intermediate reasoning steps to provide process-level supervision and introduces the notion of a novel reasoning step, namely, a step that is logically valid, consistent with the evolving reasoning state, and not already implied by previously accepted non-contradic...
Muhammad Asif Ali, Wen-Qing Wang, Huan Wang et al.· 0 citations