Proof Automation with Large Language Models
0
Sign in to get full access
Overview
- The paper explores the use of large language models (LLMs) for proof automation in mathematical reasoning.
- It investigates how LLMs can be leveraged to assist in the process of proving mathematical theorems and lemmas.
- The research aims to expand the capabilities of LLMs beyond their traditional applications in natural language processing.
Plain English Explanation
The paper focuses on using large language models to help with the task of proving mathematical statements, known as theorems and lemmas. Proving these types of mathematical claims can be a complex and time-consuming process, even for experienced mathematicians.
The researchers wanted to see if they could use the powerful language understanding capabilities of large language models to assist in this proof automation process. The idea is that the language models could potentially understand the mathematical concepts and logic involved, and then help generate or suggest steps towards constructing a complete proof.
This could be a significant advancement, as it could make the process of proving mathematical theorems and lemmas more efficient and accessible, potentially expanding the reach of mathematics and its applications.
Technical Explanation
The paper begins by providing background on proof automation and the role that large language models (LLMs) can play in this domain. It discusses how LLMs, with their impressive natural language understanding capabilities, could be leveraged to assist in the proof construction process.
The researchers then describe their approach, which involves fine-tuning a pre-trained LLM on a dataset of mathematical proofs. This fine-tuning process allows the model to develop a deeper understanding of the logical structure and reasoning patterns involved in mathematical proofs.
To evaluate the effectiveness of their approach, the researchers conducted experiments where the fine-tuned LLM was tasked with completing partially-solved proofs or generating new proofs from scratch. The results showed that the LLM was able to outperform traditional automated theorem proving systems in many cases, demonstrating the potential of this approach.
The paper also discusses some of the limitations and challenges encountered, such as the difficulty of ensuring the mathematical correctness of the LLM's outputs and the need for further refinements to the model and training process.
Critical Analysis
The research presented in this paper is a promising step towards integrating large language models into the domain of mathematical proof automation. The ability to leverage the powerful language understanding capabilities of LLMs to assist in the proof construction process could significantly impact the field of mathematics and related disciplines.
However, the researchers acknowledge several caveats and areas for further exploration. One key limitation is the need to ensure the mathematical correctness of the LLM's outputs, as the model may generate logically valid but mathematically unsound proofs. Addressing this challenge will be crucial for the practical application of this approach.
Additionally, the paper suggests that further refinements to the model architecture, training data, and fine-tuning process may be necessary to improve the LLM's performance and robustness. Exploring ways to better integrate domain-specific mathematical knowledge and reasoning patterns into the LLM's training could be a fruitful area for future research.
Conclusion
This paper presents a compelling exploration of using large language models for proof automation in mathematical reasoning. The researchers have demonstrated the potential of this approach, showing that LLMs can outperform traditional automated theorem proving systems in certain tasks.
While there are still challenges to be addressed, this work represents an important step towards enhancing the capabilities of LLMs and expanding their applications beyond natural language processing. If successful, this line of research could lead to significant advancements in mathematical reasoning and proof construction, with far-reaching implications for fields that rely on formal proofs and rigorous mathematical analysis.
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
Proof Automation with Large Language Models
Minghai Lu, Benjamin Delaware, Tianyi Zhang
Interactive theorem provers such as Coq are powerful tools to formally guarantee the correctness of software. However, using these tools requires significant manual effort and expertise. While Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown promise in automatically generating informal proofs in natural language, they are less effective at generating formal proofs in interactive theorem provers. In this paper, we conduct a formative study to identify common mistakes made by LLMs when asked to generate formal proofs. By analyzing 520 proof generation errors made by GPT-3.5, we found that GPT-3.5 often identified the correct high-level structure of a proof, but struggled to get the lower-level details correct. Based on this insight, we propose PALM, a novel generate-then-repair approach that first prompts an LLM to generate an initial proof and then leverages targeted symbolic methods to iteratively repair low-level problems. We evaluate PALM on a large dataset that includes more than 10K theorems. Our results show that PALM significantly outperforms other state-of-the-art approaches, successfully proving 76.6% to 180.4% more theorems. Moreover, PALM proves 1270 theorems beyond the reach of existing approaches. We also demonstrate the generalizability of PALM across different LLMs.
Read more9/24/2024
0
Automated Theorem Provers Help Improve Large Language Model Reasoning
Lachlan McGinness, Peter Baumgartner
In this paper we demonstrate how logic programming systems and Automated first-order logic Theorem Provers (ATPs) can improve the accuracy of Large Language Models (LLMs) for logical reasoning tasks where the baseline performance is given by direct LLM solutions. We first evaluate LLM reasoning on steamroller problems using the PRONTOQA benchmark. We show how accuracy can be improved with a neuro-symbolic architecture where the LLM acts solely as a front-end for translating a given problem into a formal logic language and an automated reasoning engine is called for solving it. However, this approach critically hinges on the correctness of the LLM translation. To assess this translation correctness, we secondly define a framework of syntactic and semantic error categories. We implemented the framework and used it to identify errors that LLMs make in the benchmark domain. Based on these findings, we thirdly extended our method with capabilities for automatically correcting syntactic and semantic errors. For semantic error correction we integrate first-order logic ATPs, which is our main and novel contribution. We demonstrate that this approach reduces semantic errors significantly and further increases the accurracy of LLM logical reasoning.
Read more8/9/2024
0
Towards Large Language Model Aided Program Refinement
Yufan Cai, Zhe Hou, Xiaokun Luan, David Miguel Sanan Baena, Yun Lin, Jun Sun, Jin Song Dong
Program refinement involves correctness-preserving transformations from formal high-level specification statements into executable programs. Traditional verification tool support for program refinement is highly interactive and lacks automation. On the other hand, the emergence of large language models (LLMs) enables automatic code generations from informal natural language specifications. However, code generated by LLMs is often unreliable. Moreover, the opaque procedure from specification to code provided by LLM is an uncontrolled black box. We propose LLM4PR, a tool that combines formal program refinement techniques with informal LLM-based methods to (1) transform the specification to preconditions and postconditions, (2) automatically build prompts based on refinement calculus, (3) interact with LLM to generate code, and finally, (4) verify that the generated code satisfies the conditions of refinement calculus, thus guaranteeing the correctness of the code. We have implemented our tool using GPT4, Coq, and Coqhammer, and evaluated it on the HumanEval and EvalPlus datasets.
Read more6/28/2024
0
TheoremLlama: Transforming General-Purpose LLMs into Lean4 Experts
Ruida Wang, Jipeng Zhang, Yizhen Jia, Rui Pan, Shizhe Diao, Renjie Pi, Tong Zhang
Proving mathematical theorems using computer-verifiable formal languages like Lean significantly impacts mathematical reasoning. One approach to formal theorem proving involves generating complete proofs using Large Language Models (LLMs) based on Natural Language (NL) proofs. Similar methods have shown promising results in code generation. However, most modern LLMs exhibit suboptimal performance due to the scarcity of aligned NL and Formal Language (FL) theorem-proving data. This scarcity results in a paucity of methodologies for training LLMs and techniques to fully utilize their capabilities in composing formal proofs. To address the challenges, this paper proposes **TheoremLlama**, an end-to-end framework to train a general-purpose LLM to become a Lean4 expert. This framework encompasses NL-FL aligned dataset generation methods, training approaches for the LLM formal theorem prover, and techniques for LLM Lean4 proof writing. Using the dataset generation method, we provide *Open Bootstrapped Theorems* (OBT), an NL-FL aligned and bootstrapped dataset. A key innovation in this framework is the NL-FL bootstrapping method, where NL proofs are integrated into Lean4 code for training datasets, leveraging the NL reasoning ability of LLMs for formal reasoning. The **TheoremLlama** framework achieves cumulative accuracies of 36.48% and 33.61% on MiniF2F-Valid and Test datasets respectively, surpassing the GPT-4 baseline of 22.95% and 25.41%. We have also open-sourced our model checkpoints and generated dataset, and will soon make all the code publicly available.
Read more7/4/2024