Draft, Sketch, and Prove

DSP

Maps informal mathematical proofs into formal Isabelle/HOL proof sketches and discharges the open subgoals with Sledgehammer ATPs.

Read the paper

The loop

  1. Proposes

    An LLM drafts an informal mathematical proof and translates it into a formal Isabelle/HOL proof sketch with open `sledgehammer` subgoals.

  2. Judged by

    Isabelle/HOL and automated theorem provers (E, SPASS, Vampire, Z3, CVC4 via Sledgehammer) verify each intermediate step.

  3. Steers

    Sketches are sampled independently; a problem counts as solved if any sketch is completed.

Headline result

Solved 39.3% of miniF2F test theorems in Isabelle/HOL, a more than 10 percentage point jump over prior direct tactic-generation baselines.

What this does not prove

If the high-level proof sketch omits a bridge lemma too large for Sledgehammer to close within its timeout, the whole sketch fails.

How it generalizes the harness

The LLM supplies the high-level proof skeleton while superposition and SMT theorem provers (Sledgehammer) discharge the leaf obligations.

Classification

Classification of Draft, Sketch, and Prove (DSP)
What it proposesProof
Generative modelMinerva / Codex formal sketch generator
Algorithmic authorityIsabelle/HOL kernel and Sledgehammer automated theorem provers
FeedbackProof state
What gets updatedPopulation of candidates
When it runsAt inference time
ValidityFormal (machine-checked)
EvidenceCode released
LineageOriginal system