mlsanityData to 7 Oct 2026

The Faithfulness Gap: Certifying Semantic Equivalence Between Natural-Language and Formal Mathematical Statements

arXiv 2606.16541 ↗First posted 15 Jun 2026cs.AI cs.LGcited by 3

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Autoformalization, translating natural-language mathematics into formal proof assistants, is bottlenecked not by translation fluency but by faithfulness: a formal statement can typecheck and be provable, yet still encode a different theorem than the source intended. We introduce Bidirectional Provability Fingerprinting (bpf), a framework that certifies faithfulness by characterizing each candidate through its forward and backward consequence neighborhoods in the ambient theory and matching these against probes derived from the natural-language statement. We further introduce four novel components: (i) Counterfactual Probe Generation (cpg), a contrastive procedure that synthesizes probes targeting specific drift directions; (ii) the Equivalence Spectrum, a continuous faithfulness score that replaces brittle binary verdicts; (iii) Adaptive Probe Budget Allocation (apba), an information-theoretic budget router; and (iv) Faithfulness-Guided Decoding (fgd), which uses bpf signals as a reward during autoformalization. We prove a drift detection theorem and a PAC-faithfulness result establishing that the equivalence class of a natural language statement is learnable from O(log(1/δ)/varepsilon) probes under mild assumptions. We release driftbench, a benchmark of 2,183 NL/Lean~4 pairs with controlled drift labels across six subfields of mathlib4. bpf,+,cpg detects 89.6% of drifted formalizations at a 3.0% false-positive rate-against 41.2% for typecheck and 63.3% for LLM-judge baselines, and fgd reduces the rate at which a state-of-the-art autoformalizer emits drifted statements by 47%. https://pmlrbd.github.io/BPF/

Key facts. Cited by 3 papers in the map (data through 7 Oct 2026). Builds on 15 of its 23 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 15 Jun 2026.

Builds on

15 of 23 references.

References · 15

  1. 2021Evaluating Large Language Models Trained on Codecited by 8,053
  2. 2021Program Synthesis with Large Language Modelscited by 3,509
  3. 2023LeanDojo: Theorem Proving with Retrieval-Augmented Language Modelscited by 414
  4. 2023Llemma: An Open Language Model For Mathematicscited by 385
  5. 2021MiniF2F: a cross-system benchmark for formal Olympiad-level mathematicscited by 380
  6. 2020Generative Language Modeling for Automated Theorem Provingcited by 379
  7. 2022Draft, Sketch, and Prove: Guiding Formal Theorem Provers with Informal Proofscited by 278
  8. 2022Autoformalization with Large Language Modelscited by 252
  9. 2022HyperTree Proof Search for Neural Theorem Provingcited by 192
  10. 2023ProofNet: Autoformalizing and Formally Proving Undergraduate-Level Mathematicscited by 180
  11. 2021Proof Artifact Co-training for Theorem Proving with Language Modelscited by 130
  12. 2022Thor: Wielding Hammers to Integrate Language Models and Automated Theorem Proverscited by 97
3 more
  1. 2022NaturalProver: Grounded Mathematical Proof Generation with Language Modelscited by 72
  2. 2023FIMO: A Challenge Formal Dataset for Automated Theorem Provingcited by 54
  3. 2018First Experiments with Neural Translation of Informal to Formal Mathematicscited by 52

Built on by

Cited by year (2026 to 7 Oct)

Citing papers per year: 2026: 3.

3 papers.