5 comments

  • awei 24 minutes ago
    Something weird here, why is it so hard to have a deterministic program capable of checking a proof or anything math related, aren't maths super deterministic when natural language is not. From first principles, it should be possible to do this without a llm verifier.
    • riku_iki 1 minute ago
      such high performance program indeed could potentially be superior, if it would exist (this area is very undeveloped, there is no existing distributed well established solution which could handle large domain) and math would be formalized in that program's dsl, which also didn't happen yet.
  • agentultra 12 minutes ago
    So it's designed for informal proofs and it "verifies" based on a rubric fitting function and human interaction, is that right?

    What's the use case for a system like this?

  • zaxioms 29 minutes ago
    It's cool, but I genuinely cannot fathom why they are targeting natural language proofs instead of a proof assistant.
    • mamami 7 minutes ago
      Natural language is a lot more, well, readable than say lean. You get a lot less intuition and understanding of what the model is attempting to do in the first place.
  • photon_lines 43 minutes ago
    Exciting stuff from a fantastic team.