FormalRx is introduced, a comprehensive diagnostic evaluation framework that transforms autoformalization assessment from black-box judgments into actionable feedback, and enables systematic diagnosis and improvement of autoformalization systems.
Abstract
The veracious semantic alignment in autoformalization is significant for formal mathematical reasoning. However, existing evaluations provide only opaque binary verdicts or scalar scores, offering no interpretable insight into where or why translations fail. This opacity severely limits both human understanding and automated system improvement. To bridge this gap, we introduce FormalRx, a comprehensive diagnostic evaluation framework that transforms autoformalization assessment from black-box judgments into actionable feedback. At its core is SCI Error Taxonomy, a hierarchical classification scheme decomposing autoformalization errors into 28 distinct categories with strict priority ordering. Building on this taxonomy, FormalRx provides four critical diagnostic capabilities: alignment verdicts, error categorization, error localization, and correction. We instantiate the framework with a diagnostic model FormalRx-8B, trained on 56,287 NL-FL pairs with fine-grained diagnostic annotations, and release FormalRx-Test as the first fine-grained diagnostic benchmark. FormalRx-8B achieves F1-scores of 0.88 (verdict) and 0.71 (categorization), along with accuracies of 0.75 (localization) and 0.73 (correction), substantially outperforming both general-purpose LLMs and specialized baselines. By connecting evaluation with actionable insights, FormalRx enables systematic diagnosis and improvement of autoformalization systems.
Generative Verification (GenV) is introduced, which distills an offline Z3-equivalence oracle into a reference-free, continuous reference-equivalence score by repurposing the language model's native vocabulary space and theoretically proves that structural, verdict-only verification heuristics are mathematically bounde...
Vikash Singh, Debargha Ganguly, Aman Goel et al.· 0 citations
FaithSieve is introduced, a Lean-assisted framework for fine-grained evaluation of natural-language mathematical proofs that demonstrates that decomposing proofs into fine-grained units and grounding them with faithful formal evidence significantly improves reliable evaluation of natural-language reasoning.
Zi-Yu Wang, Qi-Yu Dai, Yi-Shan Wu et al.· 0 citations
Empirical evaluations show that TriQuaScore strongly aligns with human annotated factuality scores, TriQua achieves robust decomposition quality, and outperforms existing decomposition-based frameworks in evidence-based fact verification.
Jin Liu, Steffen Thoma, Achim Rettinger· 0 citations
A common mathematical language did not erase translation provenance, and robust ordering under one observable did not transfer to another, in secondary analyses of an openly archived crossed experiment.
This work proposes Sequential Epistemic and Action-Level Validation (SEAV), a verification-centric jailbreak evaluation framework that decomposes responses into ordered steps and evaluates both validity and correctness, and shows that enforcing correctness substantially reshapes measured robustness.
Qilong Wu, Sahil Wadhwa, Pranab Mohanty et al.· 0 citations
MathForm is introduced, an autoformalization framework for constructing verified training data through Mathlib knowledge retrieval and verification-guided iterative refinement, and outperforming multiple specialized 32B autoformalizers.
Lushi Pu, Weiming Zhang, Xinheng Xie et al.· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.