BRIDGE: Building Representations In Domain Guided Program Synthesis
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Large language models can generate plausible code, but remain brittle for formal verification in proof assistants such as Lean. A central scalability challenge is that verified synthesis requires consistent artifacts across several coupled domains: executable code, formal specifications, theorem statements, and proof attempts. Existing approaches often treat these artifacts separately. We present BRIDGE, a structured prompting framework for multi-artifact program synthesis. BRIDGE decomposes generation into three interconnected domains: Code, Specification, and Theorem/Proof, and uses domain-specific intermediate reasoning to connect them. In Lean, BRIDGE often follows a code-first workflow, using the generated implementation as a semantic anchor for downstream specification, theorem statement, and proof-attempt generation. Across 178 algorithmic problems and five LLMs, BRIDGE improves Lean executable correctness by up to nearly 1.5x over direct prompting and can be roughly 2x more sample efficient at comparable generation lengths. We further find that specification-oriented prompting improves Python pass rates by up to 17.5 percentage points. Beyond inference-time prompting, supervised fine-tuning on BRIDGE-style reasoning traces yields nearly 1.5x higher Lean pass success than code-only fine-tuning, suggesting that these intermediate representations provide a learnable inductive bias. BRIDGE provides a practical framework for scaling verified synthesis while highlighting the remaining gap between executable correctness and full formal proof generation.
Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 16 of its 29 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 26 Nov 2025.
Builds on
16 of 29 references.
References · 16
- 2022Chain-of-Thought Prompting Elicits Reasoning in Large Language Modelscited by 12,459
- 2022ReAct: Synergizing Reasoning and Acting in Language Modelscited by 8,695
- 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,320
- 2022Self-Consistency Improves Chain of Thought Reasoning in Language Modelscited by 5,708
- 2023Reflexion: Language Agents with Verbal Reinforcement Learningcited by 4,276
- 2023Tree of Thoughts: Deliberate Problem Solving with Large Language Modelscited by 3,211
- 2022Competition-Level Code Generation with AlphaCodecited by 1,462
- 2020CodeBERT: A Pre-Trained Model for Programming and Natural Languagescited by 1,310
- 2020GraphCodeBERT: Pre-training Code Representations with Data Flowcited by 609
- 2019The Lean mathematical librarycited by 134
- 2024Enchanting Program Specification Synthesis by Large Language Models using Static Analysis and Program Verificationcited by 58
- 2023Verus: Verifying Rust Programs using Linear Ghost Types (extended version)cited by 53
4 more
- 2025CLEVER: A Curated Benchmark for Formally Verified Code Generationcited by 29
- 2025A benchmark for vericoding: formally verified program synthesiscited by 20
- 2024miniCodeProps: a Minimal Benchmark for Proving Code Propertiescited by 18
- 2025Local Success Does Not Compose: Benchmarking Large Language Models for Compositional Formal Verificationcited by 6
Built on by
Not cited yet.
Similar, not cited
Close in wording, no citation either way
- 2026P3: Joint Program-and-Proof Planning for Verified Code Generation
- 2026LiveFMBench: Unveiling the Power and Limits of Agentic Workflows in Specification Generation
- 2025Generating Verifiable Chain of Thoughts from Exection-Traces
- 2026Intent-aligned Formal Specification Synthesis via Traceable Refinement
- 2026AlgoVeri: An Aligned Benchmark for Verified Code Generation on Classical Algorithms
- 2026PROMISE: Proof Automation as Structural Imitation of Human Reasoning
- 2025L0-Reasoning Bench: Evaluating Procedural Correctness in Language Models via Simple Program Execution
- 2026SkillForge: Compositional Skill Synthesis with Verification-in-the-Loop for Generating Formally Verified Dafny Programs