Skip to content

FormalRx: Rectify and eXamine Semantic Failures in Autoformalization

Jul 2026 · arXiv.org · Vol abs/2607.04655 · 1 citation · 47 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

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.

View source

Similar papers

#machine learning Preprint Sep 2026

Beyond Solver Verdicts: Generative Reward Models for Autoformalization

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
Preprint Aug 2026

FaithSieve: Fine-Grained Evaluation of Math Proofs with Faithful Formal Evidence

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
Preprint Aug 2026

TriQua: Reconciling Granularity and Context in Factuality Evaluation

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
#artificial intelligence Preprint Aug 2026

Validity-Aware Jailbreak Evaluation for Large Language Models

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

We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads. See our Cookie Policy.