Proof-Verified Benchmark Rewriting (RePro) is proposed, the first framework to integrate Lean-oriented neural automated theorem provers (ATPs) into benchmark rewriting, which rewrites problems and regenerates answers with correctness ensured by Lean-verified proofs.
Abstract
Data contamination undermines the reliable evaluation of large language models (LLMs) on mathematical problem solving. While rewriting-based evaluation mitigates memorization, existing methods lack guarantees of problem validity and answer correctness. We propose Proof-Verified Benchmark Rewriting (RePro), the first framework to integrate Lean-oriented neural automated theorem provers (ATPs) into benchmark rewriting, which rewrites problems and regenerates answers with correctness ensured by Lean-verified proofs. Experiments on GSM8K and MATH show that RePro's retained rewritten instances achieve 100% well-definedness, feasibility, and answer correctness, while existing methods still produce invalid or incorrect instances. Moreover, several models exhibit accuracy drops on proof-verified rewritten benchmarks, suggesting that their performance is sensitive to surface-level and structural variations and may partly reflect memorization effects. Our source code and data are available at https://github.com/AI4Engi/RePro.
Evaluating state-of-the-art open LLMs reveals a significant robustness gap, and shows that reliable process-level verification remains challenging, and evaluator robustness should be measured separately from solver accuracy, even in a simple algebraic domain with exact ground truth.
SOVER, an LLM-assisted SMT framework that separates semantic mapping from formal certification, is introduced, and Z3 checks domain cross-feasibility and global objective-order preservation for mixed-integer linear formulations, while dReal provides tolerance-aware feasibility/range and $\epsilon$-argmin checks for con...
This work presents Benchproofer, a pipeline that turns a coding task with a known correct patch into a formally verified one, which writes a specification for the new code, summarizes the existing functions that code calls with axioms, and admits an instance only after mechanical and adversarial gates agree.
George Ma, Benjamin Mikek, Hao-Yu Li et al.· 1 citation
Large Language Models (LLMs) are increasingly incorporated into verifier-in-the-loop software engineering systems, yet it remains unclear how the representation of verifier feedback affects their ability to repair incorrect programs. We study this question by isolating feedback representation from model, task, and prom...
Tao-Er Guo· Proceedings of the 7th Inter...· 0 citations
On a new benchmark of 77 problems with an exact oracle, translation to Answer Set Programming is faithful on six of seven domains and fails only on aggregate coverage scheduling, which concentrates the translation tax in one diagnosable pattern.
The results show that point accuracy alone is insufficient for characterizing LLM reliability in assertion generation and motivate robustness-aware evaluation for AI-assisted hardware verification.