TheoremGraph: Bridging Formal and Informal Mathematics

Mathematical knowledge is organized around statements and their dependencies, but this structure is exposed unevenly: informal papers cite mostly at the document level, while formal libraries record fine-grained dependencies over a much smaller body of mathematics. We introduce TheoremGraph, a unified statement-level dependency graph spanning both informal and formal mathematics. On the informal side, we parse 11.7M theorem-like environments from mathematics arXiv and recover 18.3M candidate directed dependencies, each labeled by the extractor that proposed it so downstream users can trade coverage for precision. On the formal side, we release LeanGraph, a Lean 4 elaborator-level extractor producing 388,105 declaration nodes and 11.3M typed edges across 25 Lean projects. We bridge the two graphs by embedding generated natural-language slogans into a shared semantic space, linking related statements across papers and across the informal/formal divide; an LLM judge affirms 47,952 such matches above a 0.8 cosine floor, with the judge-acceptance rate rising from 48% across the floor to 87% in the >=0.9 tier. On formal concept retrieval, our name-and-signature representation with graph expansion comes within 0.5pp of LeanSearch v2's reranked Recall@10 (0.775 vs. 0.780) without an LM reranker. We release the dataset, extractors, HTTP API, and MCP interface as infrastructure for mathematical search, attribution, and retrieval-augmented reasoning, available at theoremsearch.com and huggingface.co/datasets/uw-math-ai/theorem-matching.

FactorLibrary: From Polynomials to Circuits via Recursive Subgoals

Finding minimal arithmetic circuits for polynomials over finite fields is a combinatorially hard problem central to algebraic complexity theory. We formulate it as a reinforcement learning problem in two directions, bottom-up and top-down. To address the challenge of a fast-growing combinatorial search space, we introduce FactorLibrary, which stores factorizable subexpressions that serve as reusable subgoals across training episodes. We trained a bottom-up agent with Gumbel-PPO-MCTS and two top-down agents with PPO+MCTS and SAC. The PPO+MCTS top-down agent exhibited the most stable performance, finding certified optimal circuits up to complexity $8$ with a success rate of $91.8\%$.

Does My Embedding Reflect That $A = B$? Evaluating Mathematical Equivalence in Embedding Models

Because mathematics is highly abstract, a single statement can take very different forms depending on what subfield it is framed in. There are many examples where breakthroughs occurred after researchers discovered that a question had already been answered in a different field. At the same time, the growth of new resources related to formalization has increased the need for tools that enable efficient and reliable navigation between mathematical 'languages' (e.g., from Lean to natural language). In this paper, we investigate whether current embedding models capture mathematical equivalence. To do this, we introduce the Mathematically Equivalent but Lexically Different Pairs (MELD) Dataset, a collection of mathematically equivalent statements that are expressed in very different language. We show that current state-of-the-art embedding models tend to group statements by the terminology used to make them instead of the underlying math. Motivated by this, we propose a contrastive approach to learning embeddings of mathematical text that focuses on aligning informal statements with different formalizations. Our experiments demonstrate that this leads to improvements not only on informal-formal retrieval tasks but also on MELD, which only contains natural language statements.

Evaluation of LLMs for Mathematical Formalization in Lean

Within the past few years, the ability of Large Language Models (LLMs) to generate formal mathematical proofs has improved drastically. We provide a comparison of various LLMs' effectiveness in producing formal proofs in Lean 4 with the goal of assisting those seeking to use LLMs to support their own projects. We utilize both pass@$k$ and refine@$k$ metrics as the benchmark for our comparison and evaluate on subsets of both miniF2F and miniCTX datasets. Our testing shows that overall, Gemini 3.1 Pro and Claude Opus 4.7 perform best. Gemini 3.1 Pro achieved a 92\% success rate on miniF2F via refine@32 whereas Opus 4.7 achieved a 86\% success rate on miniCTX via refine@32. When taking cost into account, NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Super and GPT-OSS 120B were the most efficient, with competitive accuracies and average costs of $<\$0.01$ per correct proof.

CircuitBuilder: From Polynomials to Circuits via Reinforcement Learning

Motivated by auto-proof generation and Valiant's VP vs. VNP conjecture, we study the problem of discovering efficient arithmetic circuits to compute polynomials, using addition and multiplication gates. We formulate this problem as a single-player game, where an RL agent attempts to build the circuit within a fixed number of operations. We implement an AlphaZero-style training loop and compare two approaches: Proximal Policy Optimization with Monte Carlo Tree Search (PPO+MCTS) and Soft Actor-Critic (SAC). SAC achieves the highest success rates on two-variable targets, while PPO+MCTS scales to three variables and demonstrates steady improvement on harder instances. These results suggest that polynomial circuit synthesis is a compact, verifiable setting for studying self-improving search policies.