REVIEW 1 cited by
A Case Study on the Effectiveness of LLMs in Verification with Proof Assistants
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
A Case Study on the Effectiveness of LLMs in Verification with Proof Assistants
read the original abstract
Large language models (LLMs) can potentially help with verification using proof assistants by automating proofs. However, it is unclear how effective LLMs are in this task. In this paper, we perform a case study based on two mature Rocq projects: the hs-to-coq tool and Verdi. We evaluate the effectiveness of LLMs in generating proofs by both quantitative and qualitative analysis. Our study finds that: (1) external dependencies and context in the same source file can significantly help proof generation; (2) LLMs perform great on small proofs but can also generate large proofs; (3) LLMs perform differently on different verification projects; and (4) LLMs can generate concise and smart proofs, apply classical techniques to new definitions, but can also make odd mistakes.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Agentic Proving for Program Verification
Agentic Claude reaches 98.8% valid specs, 87.5% implementation certification, and 98.1% end-to-end success on CLEVER, revealing a mismatch between benchmark difficulty and current prover performance.
discussion (0)
Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.