Explore/agent app/Does the Proof Prove It That Way? Faithful Formalization of Elements Proofs
D

Tadd Mao, Tianjun Zhong, Dhruva Arekar, Yuming Feng, One An, Jiani Huang, Xujie Si, Ziyang Li/Does the Proof Prove It That Way? Faithful Formalization of Elements ProofsUnknown

In formal verification, both the autoformalization of statements and automated proof search have been studied extensively. While automated proof search can produce a formal proof that compiles, the generated proof does not necessarily reflect how the natural-language argument arrives at its conclusion--a property we refer to as faithfulness. With faithfully formalized proofs, one can check the reasoning behind a human- or AI-written argument, and assist mathematicians in formalizing their proof sketches. However, it is particularly challenging due to misalignment of formal proof tactics and natural language reasoning. In this work, we rigorously describe a set of five necessary conditions a faithful formal proof must satisfy, and introduce Pistis, an agentic, oracle-guided proof search that produces formal Lean proofs that satisfy them. At its core is a novel faithfulness-preserving divide-and-conquer search, which we name OrderDecompose, that tracks citation dependencies and blocks unfaithful shortcuts, paired with a refutation search, that surfaces gaps and errors in the natural language proof source. OrderDecompose completes proofs that baselines cannot close even within a 12-hour budget, and its artifacts compile over 33$\times$ as fast as prior work's. We apply Pistis on the first three books of Euclid's Elements, producing high-quality artifacts containing faithful formal proofs. Under a blinded human study and an LLM-as-a-judge protocol on rigorous rubrics, Pistis-generated proofs are favored over prior works--2.89$\times$ and 5.2$\times$ as often by human reviewers and the LLM judge, respectively. It further uncovers gaps in Euclid's proofs and their translation, and can accept or refute natural language proofs written by humans or AI, demonstrating that faithful formalization is useful as a proof-checking tool.

agent app
GitHubCompare
Refreshed 10h ago
OverviewActivity52wAlternativesDocs
Stars0
Forks0
HF Downloads30d
Last commit
Refreshed10h ago
Project healthUnknownNo activity data.
Production readinessResearch / EarlyBest for exploration and prototyping.
Risk notesUnknown licenseVerify license before production use.
AgentHub Score
55 / 100
Composite score from 6 signals. How we score →
Active project
55Score
Growth
40C
Activity
30C
Documentation
70C+
Maturity
45C
Community
42C
Production
58C
GitHub stars · 7 days observed0 not enough history
snapshots
Repository activity · 7 days observedReal snapshots from pushed_at
inactivepushed
2026-08-192026-08-27
Practical assessment
Should you use it?

✓ Best for

  • Research and experimentation
  • Prototype development
  • Learning agentic patterns

◎ Strengths

  • Active community
  • Open source
  • Well-documented API

✕ Not ideal for

  • Untested at scale without validation
  • Teams without AI/ML expertise

⚠ Watch-outs

  • Review changelog before updating
  • Verify license for commercial use
Technical details
What's inside
Language
License
Sourcearxiv
Open source✗ No
Commercial use
Docs
Demo

AgentHub Score

55
Score 55/100
Below average

Alternatives

O
OccuReward: LLM-Guided Occupant-Centric Reward Shaping for Demographic Equity in Grid-Interactive Buildings
0 · agent app
55
U
Unaccountable Delegation, Fading Skills: Mapping the Risks of Workplace AI Agents
0 · agent app
55
D
Discovering Adaptive Transmission Programs for Collective Innovation
0 · agent app
55
A
Agentic AI-driven Immersive Simulation: A Knowledge-Aware Virtual Training Platform forHigh Dose Rate (HDR) Brachytherapy
0 · agent app
55
Compare all →

Recent activity

Latest commit —
Indexed by AgentHub crawler10h ago
Monitor for new releasesongoing