mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Extended Triangular Method: A Generalized Algorithm for Contradiction Separation Based Automated Deduction

arXiv 2510.10701 ↗First posted 12 Oct 2025cs.AI cs.LOcited by 1

On the map: LLM reasoning → Mathematical reasoning

Abstract (arXiv)

Automated deduction lies at the core of Artificial Intelligence (AI), underpinning theorem proving, formal verification, and logical reasoning. Despite decades of progress, reconciling deductive completeness with computational efficiency remains an enduring challenge. Traditional reasoning calculi, grounded in binary resolution, restrict inference to pairwise clause interactions and thereby limit deductive synergy among multiple clauses. The Contradiction Separation Extension (CSE) framework, introduced in 2018, proposed a dynamic multi-clause reasoning theory that redefined logical inference as a process of contradiction separation rather than sequential resolution. While that work established the theoretical foundation, its algorithmic realization remained unformalized and unpublished. This work presents the Extended Triangular Method (ETM), a generalized contradiction-construction algorithm that formalizes and extends the internal mechanisms of contradiction separation. The ETM unifies multiple contradiction-building strategies, including the earlier Standard Extension method, within a triangular geometric framework that supports flexible clause interaction and dynamic synergy. ETM serves as the algorithmic core of several high-performance theorem provers, CSE, CSE-E, CSI-E, and CSI-Enig, whose competitive results in standard first-order benchmarks (TPTP problem sets and CASC 2018-2015) empirically validate the effectiveness and generality of the proposed approach. By bridging theoretical abstraction and operational implementation, ETM advances the contradiction separation paradigm into a generalized, scalable, and practically competitive model for automated reasoning, offering new directions for future research in logical inference and theorem proving.

Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 14 Oct 2026). Placed in Mathematical reasoning, one of 17 directions in LLM reasoning. Builds on 6 of its 44 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 12 Oct 2025.

Builds on

6 of 44 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2020Generative Language Modeling for Automated Theorem Proving7 Sep

Other references · 5

  1. 2017Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciencescited by 1,206
  2. 2019Learning to Reason in Large Theories without Imitationcited by 27
  3. 2017ENIGMA: Efficient Learning-based Inference Guiding Machinecited by 26
  4. 2016Selecting the Selectioncited by 2
  5. 2025Dynamic Automated Deduction by Contradiction Separation: The Standard Extension Algorithmcited by 2

Built on by

Cited by year

Citing papers per year: 2025: 1.

1 paper.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Beyond Correctness: Exposing LLM-generated Logical Flaws in Reasoning via Multi-step Automated Theorem Proving
  2. 2026On Reasoning-Centric LLM-based Automated Theorem Proving
  3. 2025Hilbert: Recursively Building Formal Proofs with Informal Reasoning
  4. 2025PEA: Enhancing LLM Performance on Computational-Reasoning Tasks
  5. 2025APOLLO: Automated LLM and Lean Collaboration for Advanced Formal Reasoning
  6. 2026Learning to Disprove: Formal Counterexample Generation with Large Language Models
  7. 2025MSC-180: A Benchmark for Automated Formal Theorem Proving from Mathematical Subject Classification
  8. 2025Towards Solving More Challenging IMO Problems via Decoupled Reasoning and Proving