Lasse Blaauwbroek

Lasse Blaauwbroek, Miroslav Olšák, Jason Rute et al.

In proof assistants, the physical proximity between two formal mathematical concepts is a strong predictor of their mutual relevance. Furthermore, lemmas with close proximity regularly exhibit similar proof structures. We show that this locality property can be exploited through online learning techniques to obtain solving agents that far surpass offline learners when asked to prove theorems in an unseen mathematical setting. We extensively benchmark two such online solvers implemented in the Tactician platform for the Coq proof assistant: First, Tactician's online $k$-nearest neighbor solver, which can learn from recent proofs, shows a $1.72\times$ improvement in theorems proved over an offline equivalent. Second, we introduce a graph neural network, Graph2Tac, with a novel approach to build hierarchical representations for new definitions. Graph2Tac's online definition task realizes a $1.5\times$ improvement in theorems solved over an offline baseline. The $k$-NN and Graph2Tac solvers rely on orthogonal online data, making them highly complementary. Their combination improves $1.27\times$ over their individual performances. Both solvers outperform all other general-purpose provers for Coq, including CoqHammer, Proverbot9001, and a transformer baseline by at least $1.48\times$ and are available for practical use by end-users.

Lasse Blaauwbroek, David Cerna, Thibault Gauthier et al.

Automated theorem provers and formal proof assistants are general reasoning systems that are in theory capable of proving arbitrarily hard theorems, thus solving arbitrary problems reducible to mathematics and logical reasoning. In practice, such systems however face large combinatorial explosion, and therefore include many heuristics and choice points that considerably influence their performance. This is an opportunity for trained machine learning predictors, which can guide the work of such reasoning systems. Conversely, deductive search supported by the notion of logically valid proof allows one to train machine learning systems on large reasoning corpora. Such bodies of proof are usually correct by construction and when combined with more and more precise trained guidance they can be boostrapped into very large corpora, with increasingly long reasoning chains and possibly novel proof ideas. In this paper we provide an overview of several automated reasoning and theorem proving domains and the learning and AI methods that have been so far developed for them. These include premise selection, proof guidance in several settings, AI systems and feedback loops iterating between reasoning and learning, and symbolic classification problems.

Lasse Blaauwbroek

The Tactician's Web is a platform offering a large web of strongly interconnected, machine-checked, formal mathematical knowledge conveniently packaged for machine learning, analytics, and proof engineering. Built on top of the Coq proof assistant, the platform exports a dataset containing a wide variety of formal theories, presented as a web of definitions, theorems, proof terms, tactics, and proof states. Theories are encoded both as a semantic graph (rendered below) and as human-readable text, each with a unique set of advantages and disadvantages. Proving agents may interact with Coq through the same rich data representation and can be automatically benchmarked on a set of theorems. Tight integration with Coq provides the unique possibility to make agents available to proof engineers as practical tools.

Liao Zhang, Lasse Blaauwbroek, Bartosz Piotrowski et al.

We present a comparison of several online machine learning techniques for tactical learning and proving in the Coq proof assistant. This work builds on top of Tactician, a plugin for Coq that learns from proofs written by the user to synthesize new proofs. Learning happens in an online manner, meaning that Tactician's machine learning model is updated immediately every time the user performs a step in an interactive proof. This has important advantages compared to the more studied offline learning systems: (1) it provides the user with a seamless, interactive experience with Tactician and, (2) it takes advantage of locality of proof similarity, which means that proofs similar to the current proof are likely to be found close by. We implement two online methods, namely approximate k-nearest neighbors based on locality sensitive hashing forests and random decision forests. Additionally, we conduct experiments with gradient boosted trees in an offline setting using XGBoost. We compare the relative performance of Tactician using these three learning methods on Coq's standard library.

Lasse Blaauwbroek, Josef Urban, Herman Geuvers

We present Tactician, a tactic learner and prover for the Coq Proof Assistant. Tactician helps users make tactical proof decisions while they retain control over the general proof strategy. To this end, Tactician learns from previously written tactic scripts and gives users either suggestions about the next tactic to be executed or altogether takes over the burden of proof synthesis. Tactician's goal is to provide users with a seamless, interactive, and intuitive experience together with robust and adaptive proof automation. In this paper, we give an overview of Tactician from the user's point of view, regarding both day-to-day usage and issues of package dependency management while learning in the large. Finally, we give a peek into Tactician's implementation as a Coq plugin and machine learning platform.

Lasse Blaauwbroek, Josef Urban, Herman Geuvers

We present a system that utilizes machine learning for tactic proof search in the Coq Proof Assistant. In a similar vein as the TacticToe project for HOL4, our system predicts appropriate tactics and finds proofs in the form of tactic scripts. To do this, it learns from previous tactic scripts and how they are applied to proof states. The performance of the system is evaluated on the Coq Standard Library. Currently, our predictor can identify the correct tactic to be applied to a proof state 23.4% of the time. Our proof searcher can fully automatically prove 39.3% of the lemmas. When combined with the CoqHammer system, the two systems together prove 56.7% of the library's lemmas.