arXiv:2605.20120cs.AIcs.LO2026-05

用AI生成数学定理证明,局部验证成功但全局推理仍悬而未决。

Using Aristotle API for AI-Assisted Theorem Proving in Lean 4: A Formalisation Case Study of the Grasshopper Problem

论文配图:Using Aristotle API for AI-Assisted Theorem Proving in Lean 4: A Formalisation Case Study of the Grasshopper Problem
图 1 · 摘自论文原文
  • 通过Aristotle API生成Lean 4形式化代码,验证了4个辅助引理
  • 主定理留空未证,依赖未完成的全局计数步骤
  • 揭示AI证明中局部成功与全局缺失的关键差距

AI辅助定理证明已能生成奥林匹克级数学的完整Lean开发,但其可信性取决于实际验证的声明。本文报告了一次针对格拉什珀问题(原为IMO 2009 Problem 6)的Lean 4形式化案例研究,该问题由Aristotle API尝试证明。生成的成果包含一个广义的Lean定理版本,四个经验证的辅助引理,分别涉及局部最大性、相邻交换策略的中间和,以及对应禁止集成员关系;主定理grasshopper仍以sorry留空。验证部分表明:最终部分和等于总和,相邻交换仅影响相关中间和,新和具有预期形式,且在某位置存在相邻后继交换时强制禁止集成员关系。Aristotle输出指出,剩余数学步骤是需证明至少n个不同禁止值的全局计数,以违反|M| < n的基数假设;但Lean源码未将主定理归约为独立编码的计数引理。此案例揭示了AI形式化的核心局限:局部搜索可成功,但定理所需的全局组合计数仍悬而未决。论文贡献了一个可复现的Lean项目及对其验证与未验证内容的精确分析。

原文摘要 · Abstract (English)

AI-assisted theorem proving can now generate substantial Lean developments for olympiad-level mathematics, but the evidential status of such developments depends on which declarations are actually verified. This paper reports a Lean 4 formalization case study of an Aristotle API proof attempt for the Grasshopper problem, originally posed as IMO 2009 Problem 6. The generated artifact states a generalized Lean version of the theorem, contains four verified helper lemmas for local components of a maximality and adjacent-swap exchange strategy, and leaves the main theorem grasshopper closed directly by one unresolved sorry. The verified components establish that the final partial sum equals the total sum, that an adjacent transposition can affect only the relevant intermediate partial sum, that the changed partial sum has the expected form, and that maximality at a position admitting an adjacent successor swap forces a corresponding forbidden-set membership fact. The Aristotle output summary identifies the intended remaining mathematical step as the global counting step needed to show that these membership facts produce at least n distinct forbidden values, contradicting the cardinality assumption |M| < n; the Lean source itself does not reduce the main theorem to a separately encoded counting lemma. This case study gives an inspectable example of a central limitation in AI-assisted formalization, namely that local proof search can succeed while the global combinatorial bookkeeping required for a theorem remains unresolved. The paper contributes a reproducible Lean artifact and a precise analysis of its verified and unverified proof content.

定理证明形式化AI辅助Lean 4

Thank you to arXiv for use of its open access interoperability. PaperDance 不是 arXiv 官方产品;中文卡片由大模型生成,请以原文为准。