Conjecture

We construct counterexamples to Rockafellar's sum conjecture in which two maximally monotone operators satisfy the interior-domain condition but their sum is not maximally monotone, thereby providing the complete disproof of the conjecture. We establish a general construction theorem that computes the entire monotone polar of a class of graphs, gives a necessary and sufficient condition for their maximal monotonicity, and shows how a positive rank-one perturbation yields a nonmaximal sum under this condition. We verify the theorem's hypotheses and its maximality criterion on $c_0$, thereby obtaining a counterexample to the conjecture. Furthermore, we construct a bounded linear surjection from $\ell^1$ onto $c_0$ and use it to obtain the counterexample on $\ell^1$. Lean formalizations of the $c_0$ counterexample and the pullback lemma are also provided.

We identify a diagonal saturation principle in modal inverse problems: when truncation noise is isotropic, the Bayes-optimal Tikhonov shape is a closed-form power law Gamma_k proportional to lambda_k^|s| set by the prior alone, independent of the domain. Berry's random-wave conjecture decorrelates the truncation noise across modes, and Weyl's eigenvalue counting law supplies enough modes for the conclusion to survive empirical Berry violations. Together they predict an approximately flat loss landscape across the per-mode family, leaving narrow scope for a diagonal regularizer to robustly beat the closed form. On FEM-simulated acoustic rooms, the closed form is near-optimal relative to per-room oracle tuning across observation windows, and three diagonal architectures trained on the same data match its reconstruction error within 1 pp despite learning qualitatively different spectra. The framework extends to heat diffusion via a known exponential Green's function correction with no new free parameters. Saturation is restricted to the diagonal family: Learned Iterative Ridge crosses the boundary by exploiting cross-mode coupling, locating where learning starts to help.

Recent advancements in transformer length generalization theory enable us to reliably predict when a transformer can learn to solve a task. In particular, the C-RASP hypothesis (a formalized version of the so-called RASP-l conjecture) posits that transformers length-generalize on a task if and only if a solution is expressible in the C-RASP language. While this hypothesis has strong empirical validation, theoretical problems arise from the fact that no computable length generalization bounds exist for C-RASP, alongside the discovery of seemingly contradictory experiments. To address these problems, we refine the C-RASP hypothesis utilizing the recently-proposed fragments C-RASP+ and C-RASP1. These fragments have computable length generalization bounds, though in the worst case requiring an extremely large (double exponential) sample size. It is an open question whether these sample size bounds are tight. In this paper, we resolve this open question by providing an exponentially tighter bound. In doing so, we show a polynomial length generalization bound for transformers if we adopt compressed strings, via a novel connection to power words. As an application, we show how this yields a fine-grained analysis of the C-RASP conjecture that resolves contradicting experimental evidence against it.

We report on our ongoing project to develop a computational pipeline, AutoGraphForge, for an automated graph-theoretic conjecturing-refuting-formalizing-proving system. Conjecture generation is counterexample-guided and runs in rounds: a Graffiti3 generator proposes conjectures over a small, evolving snapshot table $T$ (initially a few hundred graphs with their computed invariants) that grows only by counterexamples to its own conjectures. A novelty filter of $559$ classical and folklore relations, closed under transitive composition and linear identity substitution, decides via a linear program whether a candidate is already implied by known results. Surviving candidates are tested against a dataset of about $348,000$ graphs, unioning the complete House of Graphs invariant export, the exhaustive census of all connected graphs on at most nine vertices, several extremal families (strongly regular, minimal Ramsey, Cayley, cages, barbells, lollipops, spiders), and random models. Counterexample-search algorithms then attack the remainder. Run for several rounds on an HPC cluster, the loop yields $6,522$ conjectures that survived the refutation dataset, the novelty filter and every active-search run -- among them nontrivial relations between the annihilation number and the edge-cover number for bipartite and regular graphs, which we prove by hand. A subsequent formalization and proving stage deterministically translates each surviving conjecture into a Lean 4 statement skeleton; every candidate proof is kernel-verified against a pinned mathlib4 and our custom invariant preamble. This stage integrates two neural provers -- DeepSeek-Prover-V2-671B (served with vLLM) and the Lean-specialised OProver-32B -- behind the independent kernel check. It is implemented end-to-end and passes initial sanity checks, with the full pipeline currently running on the cluster.

We construct OEIS Open, a benchmark based on 492 open mathematical conjectures from the OEIS, formalized in Lean by Tsoukalas et al. Whereas these conjectures had previously been attempted only with a bespoke agent, our open-source evaluation code runs any generic language model (LM) against them, and is secure against LM cheating attempts. We find that LMs equipped with a minimal set of tools resolve 147 of these conjectures with a budget of $50 per attempt, scoring 30% on OEIS Open. OEIS Open Lite is a random subset of 100 conjectures for cheaper evaluation. When evaluated with a budget of $200 per attempt, the best current LM scores 44% on OEIS Open Lite. Giving LMs access to the mathematics literature via 476,000 papers from arXiv did not increase performance on OEIS Open Lite, and nor did using more sophisticated agent loops. The conjectures covered in this work are of uncertain mathematical significance, and most have likely received little previous attention. Nevertheless, our results show that LMs can resolve open research conjectures autonomously and at modest cost.

We construct unambiguous DNFs having width $O(n)$ but $0$-certificate complexity $Ω(n^2)$. By utilizing the special structure of these DNFs, we prove a lifting theorem with a constant-sized gadget that lifts the DNF to a communication problem, while losslessly translating the separation in certificate complexity to a separation in communication complexity. This leads to an optimal refutation of the Alon-Saks-Seymour conjecture, as well as an optimal communication lower bound for the Clique versus Independent Set problem, improving the previous results of Balodis, Ben-David, Göös, Jain and Kothari (FOCS 2021, SICOMP 2023) by several doubly logarithmic factors. As further applications of our construction to query complexity and learning theory, we exhibit: (a) a family of Boolean functions that has an optimal quartic separation between certificate complexity and approximate degree, and (b) a sample compression lower bound of $Ω(\sqrt{\log c})$ for multiclass concept classes over $c$ labels.

Automatically constructing well-specified and valuable mathematical conjectures remains a central challenge in AI-assisted mathematical discovery. Many existing open problems and conjectures are often too broad, underspecified, or difficult to connect to plausible proof or refutation strategies. We view a mathematical mechanism as a structure or reasoning principle that connects the assumptions of a candidate problem to its target conclusion, such as an inequality, invariant, decomposition, or reduction to an intermediate claim. We present MECA (MEchanism-centered Conjecture Agent), a multi-agent framework that constructs conjectures by jointly developing candidate statements and their supporting mechanisms. Explorer agents propose mechanisms, test how they apply, and revise the candidate conjecture accordingly, while critic agents assess their mathematical validity and research value. Their feedback guides changes to the assumptions, scope, and conclusion. Through this process, MECA transforms broad research directions into precise conjectures with substantive mathematical support while retaining a clearly identified unresolved core. We evaluate MECA in two complementary settings. First, we compare it with a generate-and-revise baseline on reconstructing preselected target-paper conclusions from target-conditioned but article-blind source materials. Second, we construct 100 semi-open problems from literature-derived seeds and existing open problems and evaluate them through independent proof and refutation attempts by automated provers. Our results indicate that mechanism-centered refinement produces well-specified and research-worthy conjectures that remain challenging for current automated provers.

In Question~3.1 of his 1995 paper on depth and transfer, Carlson asked whether the depth of a finite-group cohomology ring is always realized by the dimension of one of its associated primes. We give a negative answer. Let $$G=\SG{128}{859},\qquad k=\kbar.$$ An exact presentation certificate proves that $\depth H^*(G;k)=2$. Okuyama's associated-prime theorem would convert an associated prime of dimension two into a rank-two elementary abelian subgroup $E\leq G$ satisfying $\depth H^*(C_G(E);k)=2$. We enumerate all $75$ rank-two elementary abelian subgroups of $G$ and obtain six centralizer types. Duflot's theorem gives depth at least three for four types, while exact ideal-quotient certificates exhibit regular sequences of length three for the remaining two. Hence every rank-two centralizer has cohomological depth at least three, so $H^*(G;k)$ has no associated prime of dimension two. The finite group presentation, the three cohomology-ring presentations, the enumeration summary, and the exact algebraic certificates are included for independent verification.

Let $t(N)$ be the largest $t$ for which there exist distinct sets $A_1,\dots,A_t \subseteq \{1,\dots,N\}$ such that $A_i \cap A_j$ is a nonempty arithmetic progression for all $i \neq j$ (Erdos Problem #272). Simonovits and Sos proved $t(N)=O(N^2)$ and conjectured $\binom{N}{2}+1$ is best possible; Szabo disproved this by a construction giving $t(N) \geq \binom{N}{2}+1+\lfloor(N-1)/4\rfloor$, proved the asymptotics $t(N)=N^2/2+O(N^{5/3}(\log N)^3)$, and asked whether $t(N)=\binom{N}{2}+O(N)$ and whether some element lies in all sets of any extremal family (the kernel question). We determine $t(N)$ exactly for all $3 \leq N \leq 12$ by exhaustive computation: in this entire range Szabo's lower bound is exact, and we conjecture that $t(N)=\binom{N}{2}+1+\lfloor(N-1)/4\rfloor$ for every $N$. Towards the matching upper bound we prove, for every $N$, that Szabo's bound is the exact maximum over all families with a common element (starred families). The proof combines a self-contained ``defect-one'' counting inequality for staircase regions with a new structural theorem: every non-progression member of such a family contains a bad pair that no other member can share. Consequently the sharpened conjecture reduces to a single remaining statement, namely Szabo's kernel conjecture that some element lies in all sets of an extremal family, and we prove first structural constraints on putative non-starred extremal families.

In Problem 6 of his 1988 paper on differential posets, Stanley asked for the least possible cardinality of a fixed rank of an $r$-differential poset and suggested that the minimum should be attained by $Y^r$, the $r$-fold Cartesian power of Young's lattice. We disprove the resulting universal coefficientwise lower bound. For every $r\geq 3$, we construct an infinite $r$-differential poset $P^{(r)}$ satisfying $\lvert P^{(r)}_4\rvert=\lvert (Y^r)_4\rvert-\lfloor r/3\rfloor$. For $r=3$, the construction replaces thirteen rank-four lower-cover blocks of $Y^3$ by twelve blocks with the same point and pair incidence multiplicities, producing the initial rank sequence $1,3,9,22,50$ instead of $1,3,9,22,51$. A reflection extension then yields an infinite differential poset. The construction does not address the cases $r=1$ and $r=2$.

We study a symbolic search space for the Collatz conjecture based on finite exponent codes of the accelerated map. Each code records the number of divisions by two after every 3n + 1 step and determines three quantities: real drift, a 2-adic start representative, and a 3-adic endpoint representative. Their combination defines the 2-3-infinity diagnostic. Counterexample-like codes should exhibit near-critical drift, small 2-adic start representatives, and endpoints compatible with growth on the scale of (3/2)^k. We prove that every infinite code generated by a fixed positive integer has asymptotically vanishing 2-adic and 3-adic residue rates. Experiments with random critical codes, mechanical critical codes, and adaptive evolutionary search at lengths 100, 200, and 400 show that adaptive search improves finite-length trade-offs, while all methods retain clearly positive residue rates. The proposed framework is not a verification method for the Collatz conjecture, but a symbolic diagnostic approach for investigating obstruction structures in exponent-code space.

I propose a new methodology to attack the fascinating Gilbreath's conjecture about prime numbers, first posted in 1878 and unsolved to this day. The problem statement is rudimentary: kids can understand it. However, despite decades of research, almost no progress has been made. This paper changes the game by presenting a new approach based on sieving, a number of new results with proof, a precise path to the solution, and solid references. It also introduces the concept of reverse sieving, along with applications to testing randomness, pattern and fraud detection, cybersecurity, synthetic data, sequence categorization and normalization, or to detect and quantify a new type of chaos in time series including Brownian motions. Magic primes, forbidden prime number constellations, cellular automata, and reduction via classes of equivalent sequences, are some of the innovative and promising topics discussed in the paper.

We report a machine-verified resolution of a problem open for over a decade in quantum optimization: the Farhi, Goldstone and Gutmann (FGG) conjecture that depth-$p$ Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA) on the ring of disagrees attains approximation ratio $(2p+1)/(2p+2)$ exactly. We found the proof using a large language model, Claude Fable 5, and verified its correctness end-to-end by the Lean 4 proof assistant. Our methodology includes several ingredients: building on a substantial Lean library of quantum information, we formalized the QAOA components and the known parts of the problem, and reduced the conjecture to a single open mathematical statement. The model was then handed the library and our agentic toolkit, and tasked with closing that gap by constructing a proof in Lean. The resulting process is a feedback loop between the model's natural-language reasoning and Lean's mechanical verification, which converged to a machine-verified proof. Human verification is required only for the structural scaffolding - that the formal statement faithfully encodes the intended claim - while the proof itself is supplied by the model and certified mechanically by Lean. The proof is nevertheless striking - the model uncovered a hidden dynamical symmetry of the problem and exploited it, borrowing tools and machinery from an adjacent field to turn a hard existence problem into an explicit construction. This work paves the way for resolving open conjectures in quantum information science and beyond.

Would experience designing faster GPU kernels also help close in on a long-standing open mathematical conjecture? Large Language Models (LLMs) integrated into evolutionary search have recently produced state-of-the-art solutions on optimization tasks, including open mathematical conjectures, GPU kernel design, scientific law discovery, and combinatorial puzzles. To achieve this, prior work applied search scaffolds to one target task at a time, so every new problem is approached from scratch and the experience accumulated during search is discarded once the model finishes its attempt. This leaves the capability of iteratively evolving a solution (e.g., knowing which part to mutate and how, deciding when to backtrack) entirely in the scaffold rather than in the model itself. Whether the model itself could acquire this capability and reuse it across different tasks has been largely unexamined. To address this, we introduce Evolution Fine-Tuning (EFT), a mid-training paradigm that teaches LLMs to evolve solutions across tasks by converting evolutionary search trajectories into supervision. We construct Finch Collection, a 156K-trajectory dataset spanning 10 domains and 371 optimization tasks, and fine-tune open-source LLMs from 2B to 9B parameters. Empirically, EFT confers cross-task generalization: across 22 held-out tasks, our models surpass their base counterparts by 10.22% on average. Furthermore, when paired with test-time RL, our model matches state-of-the-art performance on two circle-packing tasks and outperforms its base-model counterpart on the Erdős minimum-overlap problem. EFT thus serves as a "practice phase" for general-purpose discovery agents that do not solve new problems from scratch.

"Integrative" solutions are widely praised but rarely defined: we lack an operational way to tell a genuine integration -- one that makes the world cheaper to describe -- from a tidy re-description. Building on the lineage that treats creativity and intelligence as compression, we give such a criterion for creative integration (CI): the resolution of a real conflict between A and B is CI if and only if, under a fixed description language, the description length strictly shrinks (C = L_pre/L_post > 1), with the reduction located in the conflict itself. We make the judgment decidable through four binary, conjunctive gates, and we fix its extension through a taxonomy of pseudo-integration that names and rejects the look-alikes. We back the criterion with a curated, multi-domain corpus and -- crucially -- validate it not by human inter-rater agreement but by four falsifiable tests it could fail: an independent computational check, discrimination against hard negatives, out-of-sample prediction, and description-language robustness; all pass with margin. The contribution is not "creativity is compression" but its decidability, discrimination, and corpus: on this account, what makes a move genuinely creative -- rather than merely novel -- is that it compresses a conflict, with novelty and value as downstream symptoms; whether all creativity is so constituted we state as an explicit conjecture. We claim only the sign of C-1; we judge, not generate. The result is a citable primitive for a broader program.

Moonshine is an autonomous agent whose central objective is to generate mathematical conjectures. Its core capability is to extract structure from classical problems, distill new concepts, and formulate conjectures of mathematical significance. Rather than treating the solution of a single proposition as its endpoint, Moonshine builds an extensible theoretical framework through conjecture generation, bridge building, and obstacle identification. This article uses Moonshine's exploration of the Jacobian conjecture as an example. It shows how the central logic of whether local nondegeneracy can force global injectivity is transferred to one-hidden-layer affine-ridge sigmoid networks. This leads to the formulation of the \emph{Neural Jacobian Conjecture} (NJC): if such a network has strictly positive Jacobian determinant on the whole space, then it must be globally injective. By invoking GPT-5.5-pro and DeepSeek-V4-pro separately, Moonshine obtained independent complete proofs for the case $N=n+1$. In addition, with the assistance of ChatGPT through interactive use of its web interface with GPT-5.5-pro, a geometric-topological proof was developed. These results provide preliminary evidence for the plausibility of the conjecture. The general higher-width case $N\ge n+2$, however, remains unresolved and is left for further investigation. This work illustrates Moonshine's ability to autonomously generate meaningful mathematical problems and make rigorous progress on them.

The 2026 disproof of Erdős's unit-distance conjecture and Sawin's quantitative refinement show that the maximum number $u(n)$ of unit distances among $n$ planar points can exceed $n^{1+\varepsilon}$ for a fixed positive $\varepsilon$. Sawin's explicit bound gives more than $n^{1.014}$ unit distances for arbitrarily large $n$ and exposes integer parameters whose choice is not fully optimized. This report treats Sawin's parameter selection as a nonlinear integer optimization problem and develops an open-source Python optimization and verification pipeline for certificates involving prime sets $T$ and $S_Q$, integer multiplicities $k(p)$, and a rationally encoded real parameter $R$. After reproducing Sawin's certificate with $δ=0.014114\ldots$, the pipeline yields improved certificates with the same $T$. We develop a tailored integer evolution strategy achieving a certificate with $δ=0.015263\ldots$ and supporting the cautious statement $u(n)>n^{1.0152}$ for arbitrarily large $n$. For extended ramified prime ranges, the Emmerich--Cordella certificate obtained with the same framework reports $u(n)>n^{1.031}$ for $\#T=67$, illustrating the importance of enlarging $T$. Very recent MathOverflow discussions, brought to the author's attention as of version~4, report further improvements, including certificates above $δ>0.035$ and beyond $δ>0.036$. Some of these improvements may rely not only on larger prime ranges but also on modified constraint systems and additional degrees of freedom that deviate from Sawin's original formulation. Beyond this application, the work illustrates how randomized optimization heuristics can improve, verify, and refine explicit certificates for combinatorial geometry through nonlinear integer optimization.

Recent advances in large language models and agentic AI systems have enabled significant progress in mathematical discovery, from solving competition problems to tackling research-level conjectures. However, open problems in computational mathematics have received comparatively less attention: research in this area often requires not only proofs but also numerical experimentation, adversarial constructions, and algorithm design. In this paper, we introduce an agentic research system, Iteris, designed for open problems in computational mathematics. We apply Iteris to two open problems from a recent Simons Workshop collection (arXiv:2602.05394). In these case studies, Iteris generated numerical evidence, constructions, and proof drafts that led, after expert review and correction, to verified results. The first result is a phase diagram for the asymptotic comparison between conjugate gradient and randomized coordinate descent on power-law spectra; the second is a counterexample showing that QR factorization with column pivoting can fail to select well-conditioned submatrices even under low coherence. These case studies suggest that agentic AI systems can participate meaningfully in research workflows for open problems in computational mathematics, while human validation remains essential.

Automated proving of polynomial inequalities is a fundamental challenge in automated mathematical reasoning, where rich algebraic structure and a rapidly growing certificate search space hinder scalability. Purely symbolic approaches provide strong guarantees but often scale poorly as the number of variables or the degree increases, due to expensive algebraic manipulations and rapidly growing intermediate expressions. In parallel, LLM-guided methods have made notable progress, particularly on competition-style inequalities with a small number of variables. To address the remaining scalability challenges, we propose NSPI, a neuro-symbolic framework that combines the complementary strengths of LLMs and symbolic computation for polynomial-inequality proving. Concretely, an LLM proposes a conjecture in the form of an approximate polynomial Sum-Of-Squares (SOS) decomposition; we refine it via symbolic computation to obtain an exact polynomial SOS representation, which directly proves the target inequality, and we further certify the proof in Lean, yielding an end-to-end pipeline from heuristic discovery to machine-checked proof. Experiments on challenging benchmarks involving polynomials with up to 10 variables demonstrate the effectiveness and scalability of the proposed method.

As automated reasoning systems advance rapidly, there is a growing need for research-level formal mathematical problems to accurately evaluate their capabilities. To address this, we present Formal Conjectures, an evolving benchmark of currently 2615 mathematical problem statements formalized in Lean 4. Sourced from areas of active mathematical research, the dataset features 1029 open research conjectures providing a zero-contamination benchmark for mathematical proof discovery, and 836 solved problems for proof autoformalization. Notably, the repository provides a structured interface connecting mathematicians who formalize and clarify problems with the AI systems and humans attempting to solve them. Demonstrating its immediate utility, the benchmark has already been leveraged to make new mathematical discoveries, including the resolution of open research conjectures. We describe our approach to ensuring the correctness of these formalizations in a collaborative open-source project where contributions stem from an active community. In this framework, AI-generated proofs and disproofs serve as a valuable auditing mechanism to iteratively improve the fidelity of the benchmark. Finally, we provide a standardized evaluation setup and report baseline results on frozen evaluation subsets, demonstrating a climbable signal that measures the current frontier of automated reasoning on research-level mathematics.

The CAP theorem states that a distributed system cannot simultaneously guarantee consistency, availability, and partition tolerance under network partition. Inspired by this result, this paper formulates a CAP-like conjecture for Large Language Models (LLMs). The proposed trilemma states that, under semantic underdetermination, an LLM cannot always simultaneously guarantee strong correctness, strict non-bias, and high utility. A prompt is semantically underdetermined when the given premises do not determine a unique answer. In such cases, a useful and decisive response requires the model to introduce a selection criterion, preference, prior, or value ordering. If this criterion is not supplied by the user or justified by the available premises, the response becomes biased in a broad selection-theoretic sense. Conversely, if the model avoids unsupported preferences, it may preserve correctness and non-bias but may reduce utility through refusal, hedging, or clarification. The paper formalizes this correctness--non-bias--utility trilemma, develops examples, and argues that certain LLM failures arise not merely from model limitations but from the structure of underdetermined decision requests.

In this paper, we present SCALAR (Symbolic Conjecture and LLM-Assisted Reasoning), a neurosymbolic framework for automated conjecture generation in quantum circuit analysis built on top of the CUDA-Q open source framework. The system integrates quantum simulation, symbolic conjecture generation, and LLM-based interpretation. We evaluate SCALAR on 82 MaxCut instances from the MQLib benchmark dataset and extend the analysis to 2,000 randomly generated graphs across four topologies: regular, Erdos-Renyi, Barabasi-Albert, and Watts-Strogatz. The framework generates conjectured bounds relating optimal QAOA parameters to graph invariants, including known relationships such as periodicity constraints on the phase separation parameter $γ$. SCALAR also recovers previously reported parameter transfer phenomena across structurally similar instances. Additionally, the system identifies correlations between graph structural features and optimization landscape properties, which we characterize through invariant-based descriptors. Using CUDA-Q tensor network simulator, we scale experiments to instances of up to 77 qubits. We discuss the accuracy, generality, and limitations of the generated conjectures, including sensitivity to graph class and quantum circuit depth.

We provide counterexamples to the unimodal minimal filling architecture conjecture for polynomial neural networks (PNNs) with power activation functions. Fixing the input and output widths, the conjecture states that any minimal filling architecture has unimodal widths for the hidden layers. We found counterexamples via a frontier search, recursive dimension bounds on neurovarieties, and symbolic computation. Notably, several subarchitectures of our main example exhibit large defect, in contrast with the predominantly small-defect behavior observed in prior literature.

Since software performance requirements are documented in natural language, quantifying them into mathematical forms is essential for software engineering. Yet, the vagueness in performance requirements and uncertainty of human cognition have caused highly uncertain ambiguity in the interpretations, rendering their automated quantification an unaddressed and challenging problem. In this paper, we formalize the problem and propose IRAP, an approach that quantifies performance requirements into mathematical functions via interactive retrieval-augmented preference elicitation. IRAP differs from the others in that it explicitly derives from problem-specific knowledge to retrieve and reason the preferences, which also guides the progressive interaction with stakeholders, while reducing the cognitive overhead. Experiment results against 10 state-of-the-art methods on four real-world datasets demonstrate the superiority of IRAP on all cases with up to 40x improvements under as few as five rounds of interactions.

Accurate auto-formalization of theorem statements is essential for advancing automated discovery and verification of research-level mathematics, yet remains a major bottleneck for LLMs due to hallucinations, semantic mismatches, and their inability to synthesize new definitions. To tackle these issues, we present Aria (Agent for Retrieval and Iterative Autoformalization), a system for conjecture-level formalization in Lean that emulates human expert reasoning via a two-phase Graph-of-Thought process: recursively decomposing statements into a dependency graph and then constructing formalizations from grounded concepts. To ensure semantic correctness, we introduce AriaScorer, a checker that retrieves definitions from Mathlib for term-level grounding, enabling rigorous and reliable verification. We evaluate Aria on diverse benchmarks. On ProofNet, it achieves 91.6% compilation success rate and 68.5% final accuracy, surpassing previous methods. On FATE-X, a suite of challenging algebra problems from research literature, it outperforms the best baseline with 44.0% vs. 24.0% final accuracy. On a dataset of homological conjectures, Aria reaches 42.9% final accuracy while all other models score 0%.

Large language models (LLMs) have achieved remarkable progress in formal mathematical reasoning. Mathematical competition problems fall into two broad types: theorem-proving problems ask for a proof of a fully specified statement, whereas answer-construction problems ask the solver to construct an answer object and prove that it satisfies the stated specification. Existing mathematical reasoning engines mainly target theorem-proving problems, yet answer-construction problems remain less studied. This setting is challenging because model capabilities are misaligned, with general LLMs better suited to answer construction and prover LLMs better suited to proof generation, and because Lean proof checking alone does not rule out inadmissible circular witnesses. To close this gap, we introduce Enumerate-Conjecture-Prove (ECP), a neuro-symbolic framework for solving answer-construction problems in Lean. ECP uses general LLMs to perform bounded enumeration and construct candidate answers, and invokes prover LLMs to produce machine-checked proofs. ECP introduces admissibility checking to ensure that each answer is canonical and does not involve a circular argument. On answer-construction problems from PutnamBench and autoformalized MathArena, ECP formally solves 17/346 PutnamBench instances and 18/75 MathArena instances with admissible answers and proofs, outperforming LLM baselines at aligned inference budgets.