FATE: A Formal Benchmark Series for Frontier Algebra of Multiple Difficulty Levels
Jiedong Jiang, Wanyi He, Yuefeng Wang, Guoxiong Gao, Yongle Hu, Jingting Wang, Nailin Guan, Peihao Wu, Bryan Dai, Liang Xiao, Bin Dong
Abstract
Recent advances in large language models (LLMs) have demonstrated impressive capabilities in formal theorem proving, particularly on contest-based mathematical benchmarks like the IMO. However, these contests do not reflect the depth, breadth, and abstraction of modern mathematical research. To bridge this gap, we introduce FATE (Formal Algebra Theorem Evaluation), a new benchmark series in formal algebra designed to chart a course toward advanced mathematical reasoning. We present two new components, FATE-H and FATE-X, each with 100 problems in abstract and commutative algebra. The FATE series spans a difficulty spectrum from undergraduate exercises to problems exceeding PhD qualifying exams. Notably, FATE-X is the first formal benchmark to surpass both PhD-level exam difficulty and the coverage of the Mathlib library. Our evaluations of state-of-the-art LLM provers on this new benchmark reveal a stark performance gap compared to contest math: the best model achieves only 3% (pass@64) accuracy on FATE-H and 0% on FATE-X. Our two-stage evaluation reveals that models'natural-language reasoning is notably more accurate than their ability to formalize this reasoning. We systematically classify the common errors that arise during this formalization process. Furthermore, a comparative study shows that a specialized prover can exhibit less effective reflection than general-purpose models, reducing its accuracy at the natural-language stage. We believe FATE provides a robust and challenging benchmark that establishes essential checkpoints on the path toward research-level formal mathematical reasoning.
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 33ed4b4d-3a09-431c-bf81-066100479695Cited by top-tier papers4
- A Minimal Agent for Automated Theorem ProvingBorja Requena, Austin Letson, Krystian Nowakowski, Izan Beltran Ferreiro et al.ICML 2026 · 9 citations
- APE-Bench: Evaluating Automated Proof Engineering for Formal Math LibrariesHuajian Xin, Zheng Yuan, Jacques Fleuriot, Wenda LiICML 2026 · 4 citations
- SorryDB: Can AI Provers Complete Real-World Lean Theorems?Austin Letson, Leopoldo Sarra, Auguste Poiroux, Oliver Dressler et al.ICML 2026 · 4 citations
- Decompose, Structure, and Repair: A Neuro-Symbolic Framework for Autoformalization via Operator TreesXiaoyang Liu, Zineng Dong, Yifan Bai, Yantao Li et al.ICML 2026 · 1 citation
Builds on10
- miniF2F: a cross-system benchmark for formal Olympiad-level mathematicsKunhao Zheng, Jesse Michael Han, Stanislas PoluICLR 2022 · 342 citations
- HyperTree Proof Search for Neural Theorem ProvingGuillaume Lample, Timothée Lacroix, Marie-Anne Lachaux, Aurélien Rodriguez et al.NeurIPS 2022 · 271 citations
- Goedel-Prover-V2: Scaling Formal Theorem Proving with Scaffolded Data Synthesis and Self-CorrectionYong Lin, Shange Tang, Bohan Lyu, Ziran Yang et al.ICLR 2026 · 160 citations
- BFS-Prover: Scalable Best-First Tree Search for LLM-based Automatic Theorem ProvingRan Xin, Chenguang Xi, Jie Yang, Feng Chen et al.ACL 2025 · 66 citations
- OlympiadBench: A Challenging Benchmark for Promoting AGI with Olympiad-Level Bilingual Multimodal Scientific ProblemsChaoqun He, Renjie Luo, Yuzhuo Bai, Shengding Hu et al.ACL 2024 · 18 citations
Related papers
- Beyond Detection: Evaluating Fallacy Awareness of LLMs in Interactive ScenariosConghui Niu, Ningxin Wu, Ziran Zhao, Dong Yu et al.ACL 2026
- FormalML: A Benchmark for Evaluating Formal Subgoal Completion in Machine Learning TheoryXiao-Wen Yang, Zihao Zhang, Jianuo Cao, Zhi Zhou et al.ICLR 2026 · 8 citations
- Omni-MATH: A Universal Olympiad Level Mathematic Benchmark for Large Language ModelsBofei Gao, Feifan Song, Zhe Yang, Zefan Cai et al.ICLR 2025 · 3 citations
- MathConstruct: Challenging LLM Reasoning with Constructive ProofsMislav Balunovic, Jasper Dekoninck, Nikola Jovanovic, Ivo Petrov et al.ICML 2025
- DAG-Math: Graph-of-Thought Guided Mathematical Reasoning in LLMsYuanhe Zhang, Ilja Kuzborskij, Jason D. Lee, Chenlei Leng et al.ICLR 2026 · 6 citations
