In practice, today's best ATP system are however still far weaker than trained mathematicians in most research domains. Machine learning from many proofs could be used to improveonthis.

Neural Information Processing Systems http://nips.cc/

LPAR 2015: 372-386 [7] Robert Veroff: Using Hints to Increase the Effectiveness of an Automated Reasoning Program: Case Studies.

Automated theorem provers and formal proof assistants are general reasoning systems that are in theory capable of proving arbitrarily hard theorems, thus solving arbitrary problems reducible to mathematics and logical reasoning. In practice, such systems however face large combinatorial explosion, and therefore include many heuristics and choice points that considerably influence their performance. This is an opportunity for trained machine learning predictors, which can guide the work of such reasoning systems. Conversely, deductive search supported by the notion of logically valid proof allows one to train machine learning systems on large reasoning corpora. Such bodies of proof are usually correct by construction and when combined with more and more precise trained guidance they can be boostrapped into very large corpora, with increasingly long reasoning chains and possibly novel proof ideas. In this paper we provide an overview of several automated reasoning and theorem proving domains and the learning and AI methods that have been so far developed for them. These include premise selection, proof guidance in several settings, AI systems and feedback loops iterating between reasoning and learning, and symbolic classification problems.

Artificial Intelligence for Theorem Proving has given rise to a plethora of benchmarks and methodologies, particularly in Interactive Theorem Proving (ITP). Research in the area is fragmented, with a diverse set of approaches being spread across several ITP systems. This presents a significant challenge to the comparison of methods, which are often complex and difficult to replicate. Addressing this, we present BAIT, a framework for fair and streamlined comparison of learning approaches in ITP. We demonstrate BAIT's capabilities with an in-depth comparison, across several ITP benchmarks, of state-of-the-art architectures applied to the problem of formula embedding. We find that Structure Aware Transformers perform particularly well, improving on techniques associated with the original problem sets. BAIT also allows us to assess the end-to-end proving performance of systems built on interactive environments. This unified perspective reveals a novel end-to-end system that improves on prior work. We also provide a qualitative analysis, illustrating that improved performance is associated with more semantically-aware embeddings. By streamlining the implementation and comparison of Machine Learning algorithms in the ITP context, we anticipate BAIT will be a springboard for future research.

As a present to Mizar on its 50th anniversary, we develop an AI/TP system that automatically proves about 60 % of the Mizar theorems in the hammer setting. We also automatically prove 75 % of the Mizar theorems when the automated provers are helped by using only the premises used in the human-written Mizar proofs. We describe the methods and large-scale experiments leading to these results. This includes in particular the E and Vampire provers, their ENIGMA and Deepire learning modifications, a number of learning-based premise selection methods, and the incremental loop that interleaves growing a corpus of millions of ATP proofs with training increasingly strong AI/TP systems on them. We also present a selection of Mizar problems that were proved automatically.

Premise selection is a fundamental problem of automated theorem proving. Previous works often use intricate symbolic methods, rely on domain knowledge, and require significant engineering effort to solve this task. In this work, we show that Magnushammer, a neural transformer-based approach, can outperform traditional symbolic systems by a large margin. Tested on the PISA benchmark, Magnushammer achieves $59.5\%$ proof rate compared to a $38.3\%$ proof rate of Sledgehammer, the most mature and popular symbolic-based solver. Furthermore, by combining Magnushammer with a neural formal prover based on a language model, we significantly improve the previous state-of-the-art proof rate from $57.0\%$ to $71.0\%$.

The appearance of strong CDCL-based propositional (SAT) solvers has greatly advanced several areas of automated reasoning (AR). One of the directions in AR is thus to apply SAT solvers to expressive formalisms such as first-order logic, for which large corpora of general mathematical problems exist today. This is possible due to Herbrand's theorem, which allows reduction of first-order problems to propositional problems by instantiation. The core challenge is choosing the right instances from the typically infinite Herbrand universe. In this work, we develop the first machine learning system targeting this task, addressing its combinatorial and invariance properties. In particular, we develop a GNN2RNN architecture based on an invariant graph neural network (GNN) that learns from problems and their solutions independently of symbol names (addressing the abundance of skolems), combined with a recurrent neural network (RNN) that proposes for each clause its instantiations. The architecture is then trained on a corpus of mathematical problems and their instantiation-based proofs, and its performance is evaluated in several ways. We show that the trained system achieves high accuracy in predicting the right instances, and that it is capable of solving many problems by educated guessing when combined with a ground solver. To our knowledge, this is the first convincing use of machine learning in synthesizing relevant elements from arbitrary Herbrand universes.

Large formal mathematical knowledge bases encode considerable parts of advanced mathematics and exact science, allowing deep semantic computer assistance and verification of complicated theories down to the atomic logical rules. An essential part of automated reasoning over such large theories are methods learning selection of relevant knowledge from the thousands of proofs in the corpora. Such methods in turn rely on efficiently computable features characterizing the highly structured and inter-related mathematical statements. In this work we (i) propose novel semantic features characterizing the statements in such large semantic knowledge bases, (ii) propose and carry out their efficient implementation using deductive-AI data-structures such as substitution trees and discrimination nets, and (iii) show that they significantly improve the strength of existing knowledge selection methods and automated reasoning methods over the large formal knowledge bases. In particular, on a standard large-theory benchmark we improve the average predicted rank of a mathematical statement needed for a proof by 22% in comparison with state of the art. This allows us to prove 8% more theorems in comparison with state of the art.

Automated theorem proving in first-order logic is an active research area which is successfully supported by machine learning. While there have been various proposals for encoding logical formulas into numerical vectors -- from simple strings to much more involved graph-based embeddings --, little is known about how these different encodings compare. In this paper, we study and experimentally compare pattern-based embeddings that are applied in current systems with popular graph-based encodings, most of which have not been considered in the theorem proving context before. Our experiments show that some graph-based encodings help finding much shorter proofs and may yield better performance in terms of number of completed proofs. However, as expected, a detailed analysis shows the trade-offs in terms of runtime.