mlsanityData to 13 Oct 2026

Exponential Sample Complexity Separation between Flat and Hierarchical Agentic Theorem Provers

arXiv 2602.10512 ↗First posted 11 Feb 2026cs.LG cs.LO stat.MLcited by 0

On the map: LLM agents and tool use → Educational agents and math problem solving

Abstract (arXiv)

Agentic theorem provers often introduce intermediate lemmas, proof sketches, or subgoal decompositions before returning to tactic-level search. This can look like an expensive detour: if proving lemmas is itself hard, why should a learned prover spend effort there? We give a statistical learning answer. Instead of worst-case proof complexity over all formulas, we study the biased data distribution produced by a teacher prover: initial theorem states together with successful verified proof traces. We model proof search as a deterministic finite-horizon MDP and analyze offline imitation learning from those traces. The success bounds depend on the average length of teacher proofs, how predictable the teacher's next action is, and how accurately the student learns that local prediction problem. A flat student learns from fully inlined traces, so repeated subproofs appear many times in its training and test-time certificate. A hierarchical student instead predicts a reusable proof DAG and solves each shared block once. When flattening duplicates the same hard local argument exponentially many times, the sufficient-sample certificate produced by our bounds can be exponentially smaller for the hierarchical learner. This gives a concrete statistical mechanism by which reusable proof structure helps verifier-based theorem proving.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 13 Oct 2026). Placed in Educational agents and math problem solving, one of 16 directions in LLM agents and tool use. Builds on 34 of its 48 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 11 Feb 2026.

Builds on

34 of 48 references.

Closest ancestors · 1

Same direction, newest first

  1. 2025Prover Agent: An Agent-Based Framework for Formal Mathematical Proofs24 Jun

Other references · 33

  1. 2022Large Language Models are Zero-Shot Reasonerscited by 4,348
  2. 2023LeanDojo: Theorem Proving with Retrieval-Augmented Language Modelscited by 420
  3. 2023Llemma: An Open Language Model For Mathematicscited by 387
  4. 2020Generative Language Modeling for Automated Theorem Provingcited by 386
  5. 2021MiniF2F: a cross-system benchmark for formal Olympiad-level mathematicscited by 383
  6. 2023Towards Revealing the Mystery behind Chain of Thought: A Theoretical Perspectivecited by 293
  7. 2022Draft, Sketch, and Prove: Guiding Formal Theorem Provers with Informal Proofscited by 285
  8. 2025DeepSeek-Prover-V2: Advancing Formal Mathematical Reasoning via Reinforcement Learning for Subgoal Decompositioncited by 280
  9. 2022Autoformalization with Large Language Modelscited by 259
  10. 2024DeepSeek-Prover: Advancing Theorem Proving in LLMs through Large-Scale Synthetic Datacited by 231
  11. 2025Reasoning with Latent Thoughts: On the Power of Looped Transformerscited by 228
  12. 2022HyperTree Proof Search for Neural Theorem Provingcited by 195
21 more
  1. 2022Formal Mathematics Statement Curriculum Learningcited by 141
  2. 2022A Survey of Deep Learning for Mathematical Reasoningcited by 124
  3. 2024Theoretical guarantees on the best-of-n alignment policycited by 120
  4. 2023Baldur: Whole-Proof Generation and Repair with Large Language Modelscited by 119
  5. 2025Seed-Prover: Deep and Broad Reasoning for Automated Theorem Provingcited by 97
  6. 2025Scaling Test-Time Compute Without Verification or RL is Suboptimalcited by 83
  7. 2024A Survey on Deep Learning for Theorem Provingcited by 57
  8. 2025Hilbert: Recursively Building Formal Proofs with Informal Reasoningcited by 57
  9. 2025Aristotle: IMO-level Automated Theorem Provingcited by 51
  10. 2023Training Chain-of-Thought via Latent-Variable Inferencecited by 46
  11. 2018TacticToe: Learning to Prove with Tacticscited by 43
  12. 2014Near-optimal Reinforcement Learning in Factored MDPscited by 41
  13. 2024On Expressive Power of Looped Transformers: Theoretical Analysis and Enhancement via Timestep Encodingcited by 33
  14. 2025Metastable Dynamics of Chain-of-Thought Reasoning: Provable Benefits of Search, RL and Distillationcited by 25
  15. 2025Exact Expressive Power of Transformers with Paddingcited by 19
  16. 2021Majorizing Measures, Sequential Complexities, and Online Learningcited by 17
  17. 2020Efficient Reinforcement Learning in Factored MDPs with Application to Constrained RLcited by 16
  18. 2018Learning to Reason with HOL4 tacticscited by 14
  19. 2025A Formal Comparison Between Chain of Thought and Latent Thoughtcited by 14
  20. 2025On the Query Complexity of Verifier-Assisted Language Generationcited by 12
  21. 2023Lemmas: Generation, Selection, Applicationcited by 3

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2026Why Agentic Theorem Prover Works: A Statistical Provability Theory of Mathematical Reasoning Models
  2. 2021Proof Artifact Co-training for Theorem Proving with Language Models
  3. 2025Seed-Prover 1.5: Mastering Undergraduate-Level Theorem Proving via Learning from Experience
  4. 2026Optimizing the Cost-Quality Tradeoff of Agentic Theorem Provers in Lean
  5. 2026OProver: A Unified Framework for Agentic Formal Theorem Proving
  6. 2026Viva La Vida: Verification and Accumulation Failures in Multi-Agent Proof Search
  7. 2026Imitation Learning for Connection-Tableau Construction
  8. 2026Direct Optimization of Generators for Search in Automated Theorem Proving