Jarod Alper

Tyson Klingner, Drew Bladek, Escher Crawford et al.

Within the past few years, the ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate formal mathematical proofs has improved drastically. We provide a comparison of various LLMs' effectiveness in producing formal proofs in Lean 4 with the goal of assisting those seeking to use LLMs to support their own projects. We utilize both pass@$k$ and refine@$k$ metrics as the benchmark for our comparison and evaluate on subsets of both miniF2F and miniCTX datasets. Our testing shows that overall, Gemini 3.1 Pro and Claude Opus 4.7 perform best. Gemini 3.1 Pro achieved a 92\% success rate on miniF2F via refine@32 whereas Opus 4.7 achieved a 86\% success rate on miniCTX via refine@32. When taking cost into account, NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Super and GPT-OSS 120B were the most efficient, with competitive accuracies and average costs of $<\$0.01$ per correct proof.

Weikun K. Zhang, Rohan Pandey, Bhaumik Mehta et al.

Motivated by auto-proof generation and Valiant's VP vs. VNP conjecture, we study the problem of discovering efficient arithmetic circuits to compute polynomials, using addition and multiplication gates. We formulate this problem as a single-player game, where an RL agent attempts to build the circuit within a fixed number of operations. We implement an AlphaZero-style training loop and compare two approaches: Proximal Policy Optimization with Monte Carlo Tree Search (PPO+MCTS) and Soft Actor-Critic (SAC). SAC achieves the highest success rates on two-variable targets, while PPO+MCTS scales to three variables and demonstrates steady improvement on harder instances. These results suggest that polynomial circuit synthesis is a compact, verifiable setting for studying self-improving search policies.