ITPEval: Benchmarking Formal Translation Across Interactive Theorem Provers
Not on the map. Why?
Abstract (arXiv)
Formal theorem proving has emerged as a frontier challenge for machine learning, yet the ecosystem is fragmented: proofs remain siloed across incompatible systems, limiting both training data for learning-based provers and the portability of verified results. We present ITPEval, the first benchmark for evaluating automated formal proof translation across four major ITPs (Lean 4, Rocq, Isabelle, and HOL Light), spanning two distinct logical foundations. Our benchmark comprises 1,560 source files and 6,848 theorems organized into a controlled tier of axiomatized files that isolates foundational translation difficulty, and an ecosystem tier drawn from real libraries that exposes API and proof-style mismatches. We release itpeval, a unified multi-ITP verification infrastructure with state-isolated warm backends that preserve per-artifact native checking semantics. We evaluate both statement and proof translation across five frontier and open-weight LLMs on 12 directed translation pairs: statement translation peaks at 29.1% pass@1 and proof translation at 10.5%; controlled theorems reach 29.7% proof pass@1 versus 5.2% for ecosystem-level translations, confirming that library mismatch is the dominant bottleneck. In addition to pass@k evaluation, a deterministic Lean 4 BEq check establishes equivalence for 54.0% of verified source-to-Lean 4 miniF2F statement translations, showing that native type-checking alone can substantially overestimate semantic fidelity; in an autoformalization/auto-informalization round-trip study, Rocq and HOL Light are easier formalization targets than Lean 4 and Isabelle, while multi-ITP context improves pooled Lean 4 success from 4.8% to 10.6%. Our benchmark, verification infrastructure, and evaluation pipelines are publicly released.
Key facts. Cited by 1 paper in the map (data through 13 Oct 2026). Builds on 18 of its 43 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 7 Jul 2026.
Builds on
18 of 43 references.
References · 18
- 2023LeanDojo: Theorem Proving with Retrieval-Augmented Language Modelscited by 420
- 2021MiniF2F: a cross-system benchmark for formal Olympiad-level mathematicscited by 383
- 2023CodeGeeX: A Pre-Trained Model for Code Generation with Multilingual Benchmarking on HumanEval-Xcited by 298
- 2022Draft, Sketch, and Prove: Guiding Formal Theorem Provers with Informal Proofscited by 285
- 2022Autoformalization with Large Language Modelscited by 259
- 2024DeepSeek-Prover: Advancing Theorem Proving in LLMs through Large-Scale Synthetic Datacited by 231
- 2019The Lean mathematical librarycited by 130
- 2019Learning to Prove Theorems via Interacting with Proof Assistantscited by 108
- 2023CodeTransOcean: A Comprehensive Multilingual Benchmark for Code Translationcited by 56
- 2024Autoformalize Mathematical Statements by Symbolic Equivalence and Semantic Consistencycited by 39
- 2024CRUXEval-X: A Benchmark for Multilingual Code Reasoning, Understanding and Executioncited by 31
- 2024Pantograph: A Machine-to-Machine Interaction Interface for Advanced Theorem Proving, High Level Reasoning, and Data Extraction in Lean 4cited by 15
6 more
- 2025ASSESS: A Semantic and Structural Evaluation Framework for Statement Similaritycited by 8
- 2025APE-Bench: Evaluating Automated Proof Engineering for Formal Math Librariescited by 6
- 2025MiniF2F in Rocq: Automatic Translation Between Proof Assistants -- A Case Studycited by 5
- 2025ProofWala: A Framework for Multilingual Proof Data Synthesis and Theorem-Provingcited by 1
- 2025KELPS: A Framework for Verified Multi-Language Autoformalization via Semantic-Syntactic Alignmentcited by 1
- 2025TransLibEval: Demystify Large Language Models' Capability in Third-party Library-targeted Code Translationcited by 1
Built on by
Citing papers per year: 2026: 1.
1 paper.