Proof Automation with Large Language Models
Minghai Lu, Benjamin Delaware, Tianyi Zhang
Abstract
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.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 1cec4f01-b26a-40c0-adaf-a08368dcc90dCited by top-tier papers17
- VERINA: Benchmarking Verifiable Code GenerationZhe Ye, Zhengxu Yan, Jingxuan He, Timothe Kasriel et al.ICLR 2026 · 34 citations
- Premise Selection for a Lean HammerThomas Zhu, Joshua Clune, Jeremy Avigad, Albert Q. Jiang et al.ICLR 2026 · 13 citations
- ExVerus: Verus Proof Repair via Counterexample ReasoningJun Yang, Yuechun Sun, Yi Wu, Rodrigo Caridad et al.ICML 2026 · 3 citations
- Cobblestone: A Divide-and-Conquer Approach for Automating Formal VerificationSaketh Ram Kasibatla, Arpan Agrawal, Yuriy Brun, Sorin Lerner et al.ICSE 2026 · 3 citations
- LLM-Assisted Synthesis of High-Assurance C ProgramsPrasita Mukherjee, Minghai Lu, Benjamin DelawareASE 2025 · 1 citation
Builds on13
- Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language ModelsJason Wei, Xuezhi Wang, Dale Schuurmans, Maarten Bosma et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 22,562 citations
- Retrieval-Augmented Generation for Knowledge-Intensive NLP TasksPatrick Lewis, Ethan Perez, Aleksandra Piktus, Fabio Petroni et al.NeurIPS 2020 · 19,162 citations
- Solving Quantitative Reasoning Problems with Language ModelsAitor Lewkowycz, Anders Andreassen, David Dohan, Ethan Dyer et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 2,039 citations
- Autoformalization with Large Language ModelsYuhuai Wu, Albert Qiaochu Jiang, Wenda Li, Markus N. Rabe et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 364 citations
- miniF2F: a cross-system benchmark for formal Olympiad-level mathematicsKunhao Zheng, Jesse Michael Han, Stanislas PoluICLR 2022 · 342 citations
Related papers
- Baldur: Whole-Proof Generation and Repair with Large Language ModelsEmily First, Markus N. Rabe, Talia Ringer, Yuriy BrunFSE 2023 · 89 citations
- NaturalProver: Grounded Mathematical Proof Generation with Language ModelsSean Welleck, Jiacheng Liu, Ximing Lu, Hannaneh Hajishirzi et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 108 citations
- Towards Language Model Guided TLA+ Proof AutomationYuhao Zhou, Stavros TripakisFM 2026 · 1 citation
- Towards AI-Assisted Synthesis of Verified Dafny MethodsMd Rakib Hossain Misu, Cristina V. Lopes, Iris Ma, James NobleFSE 2024 · 26 citations
- Neuro-Symbolic Proof Generation for Scaling Systems Software VerificationBaoding He, Zenan Li, Wei Sun, Yuan Yao et al.OSDI 2026
