mlsanityData to 14 Oct 2026

Proving olympiad geometry theorems on a superconducting quantum processor

arXiv 2609.14533 ↗First posted 13 Sep 2026quant-ph cs.AIcited by 0

Not on the map. Why?

Abstract (arXiv)

Automated theorem proving seeks to use computational systems to prove or disprove mathematical and logical statements [1, 2]. It underpins a wide range of applications, and enhancing theorem-proving capabilities remains a central objective in artificial intelligence [3]. Although recent neuro-symbolic systems have achieved remarkable progress [4-7], their operation is ultimately constrained by classical computational architectures. Quantum computing [8], by contrast, enables information encoding and coherent parallelism beyond classical limits [9-14], raising the possibility of accelerating structured symbolic deduction [15]. Here we report the experimental realization of automated geometry theorem proving on a fully programmable superconducting quantum processor. We develop two complementary quantum proving frameworks. The first implements Wu's algebraic elimination method using quantum pseudo-division, with multivariate polynomials represented in superposition states, enabling quantum algebraic theorem proving. The second implements the full-angle method as backward symbolic reasoning through a hybrid quantum strategy-guided architecture, demonstrating a general route toward quantum symbolic proof search. As illustrative examples, we prove two theorems on a superconducting quantum processor: the perpendicularity of the diagonals of a square and a 1978 International Mathematical Olympiad geometry problem. Our results establish, at the experimental level, automated logical reasoning as a viable task for near-term quantum processors and provide a concrete pathway toward quantum-enhanced symbolic intelligence.

Key facts. No citing papers in the map yet (data through 14 Oct 2026). Builds on 14 of its 71 references that are in the map. First posted on arXiv 13 Sep 2026.

Builds on

14 of 71 references.

References · 14

  1. 2025DeepSeek-R1: Incentivizing Reasoning Capability in LLMs via Reinforcement Learningcited by 6,330
  2. 2018Supervised learning with quantum enhanced feature spacescited by 665
  3. 2025DeepSeek-Prover-V2: Advancing Formal Mathematical Reasoning via Reinforcement Learning for Subgoal Decompositioncited by 287
  4. 2020A rigorous and robust quantum speed-up in supervised machine learningcited by 271
  5. 2023Challenges and Opportunities in Quantum Machine Learningcited by 203
  6. 2021Quantum advantage in learning from experimentscited by 188
  7. 2021Quantum machine learning beyond kernel methodscited by 92
  8. 2016DeepMath - Deep Sequence Models for Premise Selectioncited by 81
  9. 2016Quantum-enhanced machine learningcited by 79
  10. 2023Evaluating Language Models for Mathematics through Interactionscited by 70
  11. 2018Reinforcement Learning of Theorem Provingcited by 69
  12. 2022Experimental quantum adversarial learning with programmable superconducting qubitscited by 39
2 more
  1. 2024Proposing and solving olympiad geometry with guided tree searchcited by 19
  2. 2026Quantum automated theorem provingcited by 1

Built on by

Not cited yet.

Similar, not cited

Close in wording, no citation either way

  1. 2025Symbolic Analysis of Grover Search Algorithm via Chain-of-Thought Reasoning and Quantum-Native Tokenization
  2. 2026A Machine-Verified Proof of a Quantum-Optimization Conjecture
  3. 2026SCALAR: A Neurosymbolic Framework for Automated Conjecture and Reasoning in Quantum Circuit Analysis
  4. 2024Quantum Compiling with Reinforcement Learning on a Superconducting Processor
  5. 2025SAQR-QC: A Logic for Scalable but Approximate Quantitative Reasoning about Quantum Circuits ↗
  6. 2024Wu's Method can Boost Symbolic AI to Rival Silver Medalists and AlphaGeometry to Outperform Gold Medalists at IMO Geometry
  7. 2025Ax-Prover: A Deep Reasoning Agentic Framework for Theorem Proving in Mathematics and Quantum Physics
  8. 2026Qiskit QuantumKatas: Adapting Microsoft's Quantum Computing exercises for LLM evaluation