Results of the summarizing process for the arXiv paper: 2407.10040v3

, , , , In this paper, we present Lean-STaR, a groundbreaking approach that significantly enhances the theorem-proving capabilities of language models in formal mathematics. Our methodology involves generating synthetic rationales using ground-truth tactics retrospectively and fine-tuning the language model to generate these rationales and predict subsequent tactics. This results in the development of the Lean-CoT model, which we further refined through expert iteration on correct proofs sampled and verified using the Lean solver. Noteworthy contributions of our work include introducing the first thought-augmented theorem proving dataset, showcasing the effectiveness of expert iteration in enhancing performance, and achieving new state-of-the-art results on the miniF2F-test benchmark with a notable increase in pass rate from 30.3% to 36.1%. These advancements not only improve automated theorem proving accuracy but also offer a scalable and efficient framework for advancing human understanding of mathematics. This could have significant impacts in education, scientific discovery, and program verification. However, it is important to acknowledge limitations of our method. One primary constraint is computational scalability issues that may impact performance. Both Lean-CoT and Lean-STaR have been fine-tuned on a relatively small dataset, which could affect their generalizability. Additionally, utilizing GPT-4 for generating synthetic data may come with a significant cost and potential biases. Moreover, expert iteration might face bottlenecks due to CPU and IO limitations, leading to slower processing speeds attributed to Lean ITP's sluggishness. In terms of related work, previous studies on learning-based theorem proving typically follow frameworks like GPT-f for training language models on (proof state, next-tactic) pairs to prove theorems within best-first tree search methods. Our focus on integrating informal thoughts into formal mathematics sets us apart from existing approaches in automatic theorem proving. Furthermore, recent research has shown that allowing language models to reason before providing an answer can enhance their performance across various tasks including math, science, and code-related challenges. While techniques like Scratchpad and Chain-of-Thought have demonstrated effectiveness in improving reasoning abilities of language models, they often require extensive annotated training examples or exposure to numerous similar instances during pre-training. Overall, our work represents a significant advancement in thought-augmented reasoning within automatic theorem proving systems like Lean-CoT and Lean-STaR. By bridging the gap between informal human thinking processes and formal proof generation through language models, we aim to revolutionize automated theorem proving methodologies for enhanced efficiency and accuracy in mathematical reasoning applications.

• - Lean-STaR is a groundbreaking approach that enhances theorem-proving capabilities of language models in formal mathematics.
• - Methodology involves generating synthetic rationales using ground-truth tactics retrospectively and fine-tuning the language model to generate these rationales and predict subsequent tactics.
• - Development of Lean-CoT model through expert iteration on correct proofs sampled and verified using the Lean solver.
• - Noteworthy contributions include introducing the first thought-augmented theorem proving dataset, showcasing effectiveness of expert iteration, and achieving new state-of-the-art results on miniF2F-test benchmark with increased pass rate from 30.3% to 36.1%.
• - Advancements improve automated theorem proving accuracy and offer a scalable framework for advancing human understanding of mathematics, impacting education, scientific discovery, and program verification.
• - Limitations include computational scalability issues, small dataset for fine-tuning Lean-CoT and Lean-STaR affecting generalizability, potential biases from utilizing GPT-4 for synthetic data generation, bottlenecks in expert iteration due to CPU and IO limitations.
• - Focus on integrating informal thoughts into formal mathematics sets the approach apart from existing methods in automatic theorem proving.
• - Bridging gap between informal human thinking processes and formal proof generation aims to revolutionize automated theorem proving methodologies for enhanced efficiency and accuracy in mathematical reasoning applications.

Summary- Lean-STaR is a new way to help computers solve math problems better. - It uses a special method to teach the computer how to think like a math expert. - A new model called Lean-CoT was created by experts to make sure the computer gets the right answers. - This new approach has made it easier for computers to solve math problems and get better results. - By improving how computers do math, we can learn more and discover new things in science and education. Definitions- Theorem-proving: Showing why something in math is true using logical steps. - Rationales: Reasons or explanations behind a decision or action. - Tactics: Strategies or methods used to achieve a goal. - Dataset: Collection of data or information for analysis. - Generalizability: Ability of findings from one situation to apply to other situations.

Introduction

Automated theorem proving has been a long-standing challenge in the field of mathematics and computer science. The ability to automatically generate formal proofs for mathematical theorems has significant implications in education, scientific discovery, and program verification. However, traditional approaches to automated theorem proving have faced limitations due to their reliance on hand-crafted rules and heuristics. In recent years, there has been a growing interest in utilizing machine learning techniques to enhance automated theorem proving capabilities. In particular, language models such as GPT-f have shown promising results in generating proofs by training on (proof state, next-tactic) pairs within best-first tree search methods. However, these approaches still struggle with capturing human-like reasoning processes and often require extensive annotated training data. In this research paper, we present Lean-STaR - a novel approach that significantly improves the performance of language models in formal mathematics by integrating informal thoughts into proof generation. Our methodology involves generating synthetic rationales using ground-truth tactics retrospectively and fine-tuning the language model to generate these rationales and predict subsequent tactics.

The Lean-CoT Model

The first step towards developing Lean-STaR was creating the Lean-CoT model - a thought-augmented theorem proving dataset that serves as the foundation for our approach. This dataset contains synthetic rationales generated using ground-truth tactics retrospectively from existing formal proofs. Using this dataset, we trained a language model on (proof state, next-tactic) pairs to generate synthetic rationales and predict subsequent tactics. This resulted in the development of Lean-CoT - an enhanced version of GPT-f specifically designed for thought-augmented reasoning in formal mathematics.

Expert Iteration

To further improve the performance of Lean-CoT, we utilized expert iteration on correct proofs sampled from our dataset and verified using the Lean solver. This process involved experts manually correcting and refining the generated proofs, which were then used to fine-tune the language model. This expert iteration process proved to be highly effective in enhancing the performance of Lean-CoT. Not only did it improve accuracy, but it also showcased the potential for human-in-the-loop approaches in automated theorem proving.

Results

Our approach resulted in significant advancements in thought-augmented reasoning within automatic theorem proving systems. The miniF2F-test benchmark showed a notable increase in pass rate from 30.3% to 36.1%, setting a new state-of-the-art result. Furthermore, our work has broader implications beyond just improving automated theorem proving accuracy. By bridging the gap between informal human thinking processes and formal proof generation through language models, we aim to revolutionize automated theorem proving methodologies for enhanced efficiency and accuracy in mathematical reasoning applications.

Limitations

While our approach shows promising results, it is important to acknowledge its limitations. One primary constraint is computational scalability issues that may impact performance. Both Lean-CoT and Lean-STaR have been fine-tuned on a relatively small dataset, which could affect their generalizability. Additionally, utilizing GPT-4 for generating synthetic data may come with a significant cost and potential biases. Moreover, expert iteration might face bottlenecks due to CPU and IO limitations, leading to slower processing speeds attributed to Lean ITP's sluggishness.

Related Work

Previous studies on learning-based theorem proving typically follow frameworks like GPT-f for training language models on (proof state, next-tactic) pairs to prove theorems within best-first tree search methods. Our focus on integrating informal thoughts into formal mathematics sets us apart from existing approaches in automatic theorem proving. Furthermore, recent research has shown that allowing language models to reason before providing an answer can enhance their performance across various tasks including math, science, and code-related challenges. While techniques like Scratchpad and Chain-of-Thought have demonstrated effectiveness in improving reasoning abilities of language models, they often require extensive annotated training examples or exposure to numerous similar instances during pre-training.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Lean-STaR represents a significant advancement in thought-augmented reasoning within automatic theorem proving systems. By integrating informal thoughts into formal proof generation through language models, we have shown the potential for enhancing automated theorem proving capabilities. Our work not only improves accuracy but also offers a scalable and efficient framework for advancing human understanding of mathematics. This could have significant impacts in education, scientific discovery, and program verification. However, there are still limitations that need to be addressed before our approach can be fully utilized. Future research should focus on addressing scalability issues and exploring alternative methods for generating synthetic data without relying on expensive language models like GPT-4. Overall, our work opens up new possibilities for automated theorem proving methodologies and paves the way towards more efficient and accurate mathematical reasoning applications.