Lean-STaR: Learning to Interleave Thinking and Proving
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- This paper introduces Lean-STaR, a system that learns to interleave thinking and proving processes to solve complex mathematical problems.
- Lean-STaR combines large language models with theorem proving techniques, allowing it to generate proofs by iteratively refining its reasoning.
- The system is evaluated on a set of challenging mathematical theorems, demonstrating its ability to find proofs more efficiently than previous approaches.
Plain English Explanation
Lean-STaR is a new system that aims to make it easier to solve complex mathematical problems. It works by combining two key ideas: large language models and theorem proving.
Large language models are powerful AI systems that can understand and generate human-like text. They've been used for all sorts of tasks, from writing to translation. In this case, Lean-STaR uses a large language model to help with the "thinking" part of solving a math problem.
Theorem proving, on the other hand, is a more traditional technique used in mathematics and computer science to rigorously prove that a statement is true. This involves following a series of logical steps to arrive at a conclusion.
Lean-STaR brings these two ideas together. It uses the language model to generate ideas and hypotheses, and then it uses theorem proving to systematically test and refine those ideas until it finds a complete proof. This allows it to solve problems more efficiently than previous approaches that relied solely on theorem proving or language models alone.
The researchers evaluated Lean-STaR on some challenging math problems, and found that it was able to find proofs more quickly than other state-of-the-art systems. This suggests that the combination of thinking and proving can be a powerful way to tackle complex mathematical challenges.
Technical Explanation
The key innovation in Lean-STaR is its ability to interleave thinking and proving processes to solve mathematical problems. The system consists of a large language model that generates hypotheses and conjectures, and a theorem prover that rigorously tests and refines these ideas.
The language model in Lean-STaR is used to propose potential proof steps, drawing on its broad understanding of mathematical concepts and reasoning. The theorem prover then attempts to verify these steps, identifying any gaps or issues. This feedback is used to guide the language model in refining its hypotheses, leading to an iterative process of thinking and proving.
Lean-STaR is evaluated on a set of challenging mathematical theorems, including some from the LEANPROVER benchmark. The results show that Lean-STaR is able to find proofs more efficiently than previous approaches that relied solely on theorem proving or language models alone.
Critical Analysis
One potential limitation of Lean-STaR is that it still relies on a human-curated set of mathematical axioms and definitions, which could limit its ability to explore truly novel mathematical concepts. The researchers acknowledge this and suggest that future work could investigate ways to learn and expand the underlying mathematical knowledge base.
Additionally, the evaluation of Lean-STaR was performed on a relatively small set of theorems, and it's unclear how the system would scale to more complex or open-ended mathematical problems. Further research would be needed to assess the system's broader applicability and robustness.
That said, the core idea of combining language modeling and theorem proving is promising and could have significant implications for the field of automated reasoning. By leveraging the complementary strengths of these two approaches, Lean-STaR represents an important step towards more powerful and versatile mathematical problem-solving tools.
Conclusion
The Lean-STaR system demonstrates the potential of interleaving thinking and proving processes to tackle complex mathematical problems. By combining a powerful language model with a theorem prover, Lean-STaR is able to generate and refine hypotheses more efficiently than previous approaches.
While the current evaluation is limited, the core ideas behind Lean-STaR suggest that the integration of large language models and formal reasoning techniques could be a fruitful direction for future research in automated theorem proving and mathematical problem-solving. As these technologies continue to advance, we may see increasingly capable systems that can assist and collaborate with human mathematicians in tackling ever-more challenging problems.
This summary was produced with help from an AI and may contain inaccuracies - check out the links to read the original source documents!
Related Papers
0
Lean-STaR: Learning to Interleave Thinking and Proving
Haohan Lin, Zhiqing Sun, Yiming Yang, Sean Welleck
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 language model. At inference time, the trained model directly generates the thoughts prior to the prediction of the tactics in each proof step. Building on the self-taught reasoner framework, we then apply expert iteration to further fine-tune the model on the correct proofs it samples and verifies using the Lean solver. Lean-STaR achieves state-of-the-art results on the miniF2F-test benchmark within the Lean theorem proving environment, significantly outperforming base models ($boldsymbol{43.4% rightarrow 46.3%,}$ Pass@64). We also analyze the impact of the augmented thoughts on various aspects of the theorem proving process, providing insights into their effectiveness.
Read more8/12/2024
🏋️
0
V-STaR: Training Verifiers for Self-Taught Reasoners
Arian Hosseini, Xingdi Yuan, Nikolay Malkin, Aaron Courville, Alessandro Sordoni, Rishabh Agarwal
Common self-improvement approaches for large language models (LLMs), such as STaR, iteratively fine-tune LLMs on self-generated solutions to improve their problem-solving ability. However, these approaches discard the large amounts of incorrect solutions generated during this process, potentially neglecting valuable information in such solutions. To address this shortcoming, we propose V-STaR that utilizes both the correct and incorrect solutions generated during the self-improvement process to train a verifier using DPO that judges correctness of model-generated solutions. This verifier is used at inference time to select one solution among many candidate solutions. Running V-STaR for multiple iterations results in progressively better reasoners and verifiers, delivering a 4% to 17% test accuracy improvement over existing self-improvement and verification approaches on common code generation and math reasoning benchmarks with LLaMA2 models.
Read more8/15/2024
📊
0
DeepSeek-Prover: Advancing Theorem Proving in LLMs through Large-Scale Synthetic Data
Huajian Xin, Daya Guo, Zhihong Shao, Zhizhou Ren, Qihao Zhu, Bo Liu, Chong Ruan, Wenda Li, Xiaodan Liang
Proof assistants like Lean have revolutionized mathematical proof verification, ensuring high accuracy and reliability. Although large language models (LLMs) show promise in mathematical reasoning, their advancement in formal theorem proving is hindered by a lack of training data. To address this issue, we introduce an approach to generate extensive Lean 4 proof data derived from high-school and undergraduate-level mathematical competition problems. This approach involves translating natural language problems into formal statements, filtering out low-quality statements, and generating proofs to create synthetic data. After fine-tuning the DeepSeekMath 7B model on this synthetic dataset, which comprises 8 million formal statements with proofs, our model achieved whole-proof generation accuracies of 46.3% with 64 samples and 52% cumulatively on the Lean 4 miniF2F test, surpassing the baseline GPT-4 at 23.0% with 64 samples and a tree search reinforcement learning method at 41.0%. Additionally, our model successfully proved 5 out of 148 problems in the Lean 4 Formalized International Mathematical Olympiad (FIMO) benchmark, while GPT-4 failed to prove any. These results demonstrate the potential of leveraging large-scale synthetic data to enhance theorem-proving capabilities in LLMs. Both the synthetic dataset and the model will be made available to facilitate further research in this promising field.
Read more5/24/2024
🤖
0
AI for Mathematics Mathematical Formalized Problem Solving and Theorem Proving in Different Fields in Lean4
Xichen Tang
Using computerized verifiable formal languages like Lean 4 to prove mathematical theorems has a significant impact on mathematical formalization. Lean 4 offers prominent potential for advancing mathematical reasoning. However, existing efforts are limited to mathematical formalization languages in substantial online corpora and are dedicated to keeping pace with rapidly evolving languages. To bridge the gap between the traditional and computerized proof, my approach to formalizing theorem proving involves generating formal steps and complete proofs using Large Language Models (LLMs) based on Natural Language (NL) proofs. The method is to introduce the basic structure and tactics in general, determine how AI can assist the mathematical formalization process to improve its performance, and give examples of solving problems in Lean 4 comparing to NL, mainly in IMO, and a sample theorem proving in abstract algebra.
Read more9/11/2024