TreeRPO: Tree Relative Policy Optimization

Large Language Models (LLMs) have shown remarkable reasoning capabilities through Reinforcement Learning with Verifiable Rewards (RLVR) methods. However, a key limitation of existing approaches is that rewards defined at the full trajectory level provide insufficient guidance for optimizing the intermediate steps of a reasoning process. To address this, we introduce \textbf{\name}, a novel method that estimates the mathematical expectations of rewards at various reasoning steps using tree sampling. Unlike prior methods that rely on a separate step reward model, \name directly estimates these rewards through this sampling process. Building on the group-relative reward training mechanism of GRPO, \name innovatively computes rewards based on step-level groups generated during tree sampling. This advancement allows \name to produce fine-grained and dense reward signals, significantly enhancing the learning process and overall performance of LLMs. Experimental results demonstrate that our \name algorithm substantially improves the average Pass@1 accuracy of Qwen-2.5-Math on test benchmarks, increasing it from 19.0\% to 35.5\%. Furthermore, \name significantly outperforms GRPO by 2.9\% in performance while simultaneously reducing the average response length by 18.1\%, showcasing its effectiveness and efficiency. Our code will be available at \href{https://github.com/yangzhch6/TreeRPO}{https://github.com/yangzhch6/TreeRPO}.

SeePhys: Does Seeing Help Thinking? -- Benchmarking Vision-Based Physics Reasoning

We present SeePhys, a large-scale multimodal benchmark for LLM reasoning grounded in physics questions ranging from middle school to PhD qualifying exams. The benchmark covers 7 fundamental domains spanning the physics discipline, incorporating 21 categories of highly heterogeneous diagrams. In contrast to prior works where visual elements mainly serve auxiliary purposes, our benchmark features a substantial proportion of vision-essential problems (75\%) that mandate visual information extraction for correct solutions. Through extensive evaluation, we observe that even the most advanced visual reasoning models (e.g., Gemini-2.5-pro and o4-mini) achieve sub-60\% accuracy on our benchmark. These results reveal fundamental challenges in current large language models' visual understanding capabilities, particularly in: (i) establishing rigorous coupling between diagram interpretation and physics reasoning, and (ii) overcoming their persistent reliance on textual cues as cognitive shortcuts.

LEXam: Benchmarking Legal Reasoning on 340 Law Exams

Long-form legal reasoning remains a key challenge for large language models (LLMs) in spite of recent advances in test-time scaling. We introduce LEXam, a novel benchmark derived from 340 law exams spanning 116 law school courses across a range of subjects and degree levels. The dataset comprises 4,886 law exam questions in English and German, including 2,841 long-form, open-ended questions and 2,045 multiple-choice questions. Besides reference answers, the open questions are also accompanied by explicit guidance outlining the expected legal reasoning approach such as issue spotting, rule recall, or rule application. Our evaluation on both open-ended and multiple-choice questions present significant challenges for current LLMs; in particular, they notably struggle with open questions that require structured, multi-step legal reasoning. Moreover, our results underscore the effectiveness of the dataset in differentiating between models with varying capabilities. Adopting an LLM-as-a-Judge paradigm with rigorous human expert validation, we demonstrate how model-generated reasoning steps can be evaluated consistently and accurately. Our evaluation setup provides a scalable method to assess legal reasoning quality beyond simple accuracy metrics. Project page: https://lexam-benchmark.github.io/

FormalAlign: Automated Alignment Evaluation for Autoformalization

Autoformalization aims to convert informal mathematical proofs into machine-verifiable formats, bridging the gap between natural and formal languages. However, ensuring semantic alignment between the informal and formalized statements remains challenging. Existing approaches heavily rely on manual verification, hindering scalability. To address this, we introduce \textsc{FormalAlign}, the first automated framework designed for evaluating the alignment between natural and formal languages in autoformalization. \textsc{FormalAlign} trains on both the autoformalization sequence generation task and the representational alignment between input and output, employing a dual loss that combines a pair of mutually enhancing autoformalization and alignment tasks. Evaluated across four benchmarks augmented by our proposed misalignment strategies, \textsc{FormalAlign} demonstrates superior performance. In our experiments, \textsc{FormalAlign} outperforms GPT-4, achieving an Alignment-Selection Score 11.58\% higher on \forml-Basic (99.21\% vs. 88.91\%) and 3.19\% higher on MiniF2F-Valid (66.39\% vs. 64.34\%). This effective alignment evaluation significantly reduces the need for manual verification. Both the dataset and code can be accessed via~\url{https://github.com/rookie-joe/FormalAlign}.

Benchmarking LLMs for Optimization Modeling and Enhancing Reasoning via Reverse Socratic Synthesis

Large language models (LLMs) have exhibited their problem-solving ability in mathematical reasoning. Solving realistic optimization (OPT) problems in industrial application scenarios requires advanced and applied math ability. However, current OPT benchmarks that merely solve linear programming are far from complex realistic situations. In this work, we propose E-OPT, a benchmark for end-to-end optimization problem-solving with human-readable inputs and outputs. E-OPT contains rich optimization problems, including linear/nonlinear programming with/without table data, which can comprehensively evaluate LLMs' solving ability. In our benchmark, LLMs are required to correctly understand the problem in E-OPT and call code solver to get precise numerical answers. Furthermore, to alleviate the data scarcity for optimization problems, and to bridge the gap between open-source LLMs on a small scale (e.g., Llama-2-7b and Llama-3-8b) and closed-source LLMs (e.g., GPT-4), we further propose a novel data synthesis method namely ReSocratic. Unlike general data synthesis methods that proceed from questions to answers, ReSocratic first incrementally synthesizes optimization scenarios with mathematical formulations step by step and then back-translates the generated scenarios into questions. In such a way, we construct the ReSocratic-29k dataset from a small seed sample pool with the powerful open-source large model DeepSeek-V2. To demonstrate the effectiveness of ReSocratic, we conduct supervised fine-tuning with ReSocratic-29k on multiple open-source models. The results show that Llama3-8b is significantly improved from 13.6% to 51.7% on E-OPT, while DeepSeek-V2 reaches 61.0%, approaching 65.5% of GPT-4.

FVEL: Interactive Formal Verification Environment with Large Language Models via Theorem Proving

Formal verification (FV) has witnessed growing significance with current emerging program synthesis by the evolving large language models (LLMs). However, current formal verification mainly resorts to symbolic verifiers or hand-craft rules, resulting in limitations for extensive and flexible verification. On the other hand, formal languages for automated theorem proving, such as Isabelle, as another line of rigorous verification, are maintained with comprehensive rules and theorems. In this paper, we propose FVEL, an interactive Formal Verification Environment with LLMs. Specifically, FVEL transforms a given code to be verified into Isabelle, and then conducts verification via neural automated theorem proving with an LLM. The joined paradigm leverages the rigorous yet abundant formulated and organized rules in Isabelle and is also convenient for introducing and adjusting cutting-edge LLMs. To achieve this goal, we extract a large-scale FVELER3. The FVELER dataset includes code dependencies and verification processes that are formulated in Isabelle, containing 758 theories, 29,125 lemmas, and 200,646 proof steps in total with in-depth dependencies. We benchmark FVELER in the FVEL environment by first fine-tuning LLMs with FVELER and then evaluating them on Code2Inv and SV-COMP. The results show that FVEL with FVELER fine-tuned Llama3- 8B solves 17.39% (69 -> 81) more problems, and Mistral-7B 12% (75 -> 84) more problems in SV-COMP. And the proportion of proof errors is reduced. Project page: https://fveler.github.io/.

Process-Driven Autoformalization in Lean 4

Autoformalization, the conversion of natural language mathematics into formal languages, offers significant potential for advancing mathematical reasoning. However, existing efforts are limited to formal languages with substantial online corpora and struggle to keep pace with rapidly evolving languages like Lean 4. To bridge this gap, we propose a new benchmark \textbf{Form}alization for \textbf{L}ean~\textbf{4} (\textbf{\name}) designed to evaluate the autoformalization capabilities of large language models (LLMs). This benchmark encompasses a comprehensive assessment of questions, answers, formal statements, and proofs. Additionally, we introduce a \textbf{P}rocess-\textbf{S}upervised \textbf{V}erifier (\textbf{PSV}) model that leverages the precise feedback from Lean 4 compilers to enhance autoformalization. Our experiments demonstrate that the PSV method improves autoformalization, enabling higher accuracy using less filtered training data. Furthermore, when fine-tuned with data containing detailed process information, PSV can leverage the data more effectively, leading to more significant improvements in autoformalization for Lean 4. Our dataset and code are available at \url{https://github.com/rookie-joe/PDA}.

AutoCV: Empowering Reasoning with Automated Process Labeling via Confidence Variation

In this work, we propose a novel method named \textbf{Auto}mated Process Labeling via \textbf{C}onfidence \textbf{V}ariation (\textbf{\textsc{AutoCV}}) to enhance the reasoning capabilities of large language models (LLMs) by automatically annotating the reasoning steps. Our approach begins by training a verification model on the correctness of final answers, enabling it to generate automatic process annotations. This verification model assigns a confidence score to each reasoning step, indicating the probability of arriving at the correct final answer from that point onward. We detect relative changes in the verification's confidence scores across reasoning steps to automatically annotate the reasoning process. This alleviates the need for numerous manual annotations or the high computational costs associated with model-induced annotation approaches. We experimentally validate that the confidence variations learned by the verification model trained on the final answer correctness can effectively identify errors in the reasoning steps. Subsequently, we demonstrate that the process annotations generated by \textsc{AutoCV} can improve the accuracy of the verification model in selecting the correct answer from multiple outputs generated by LLMs. Notably, we achieve substantial improvements across five datasets in mathematics and commonsense reasoning. The source code of \textsc{AutoCV} is available at \url{https://github.com/rookie-joe/AUTOCV}.

Proving Theorems Recursively

Recent advances in automated theorem proving leverages language models to explore expanded search spaces by step-by-step proof generation. However, such approaches are usually based on short-sighted heuristics (e.g., log probability or value function scores) that potentially lead to suboptimal or even distracting subgoals, preventing us from finding longer proofs. To address this challenge, we propose POETRY (PrOvE Theorems RecursivelY), which proves theorems in a recursive, level-by-level manner in the Isabelle theorem prover. Unlike previous step-by-step methods, POETRY searches for a verifiable sketch of the proof at each level and focuses on solving the current level's theorem or conjecture. Detailed proofs of intermediate conjectures within the sketch are temporarily replaced by a placeholder tactic called sorry, deferring their proofs to subsequent levels. This approach allows the theorem to be tackled incrementally by outlining the overall theorem at the first level and then solving the intermediate conjectures at deeper levels. Experiments are conducted on the miniF2F and PISA datasets and significant performance gains are observed in our POETRY approach over state-of-the-art methods. POETRY on miniF2F achieves an average proving success rate improvement of 5.1%. Moreover, we observe a substantial increase in the maximum proof length found by POETRY, from 10 to 26.

ATG: Benchmarking Automated Theorem Generation for Generative Language Models

Humans can develop new theorems to explore broader and more complex mathematical results. While current generative language models (LMs) have achieved significant improvement in automatically proving theorems, their ability to generate new or reusable theorems is still under-explored. Without the new theorems, current LMs struggle to prove harder theorems that are distant from the given hypotheses with the exponentially growing search space. Therefore, this paper proposes an Automated Theorem Generation (ATG) benchmark that evaluates whether an agent can automatically generate valuable (and possibly brand new) theorems that are applicable for downstream theorem proving as reusable knowledge. Specifically, we construct the ATG benchmark by splitting the Metamath library into three sets: axioms, library, and problem based on their proving depth. We conduct extensive experiments to investigate whether current LMs can generate theorems in the library and benefit the problem theorems proving. The results demonstrate that high-quality ATG data facilitates models' performances on downstream ATP. However, there is still room for current LMs to develop better ATG and generate more advanced and human-like theorems. We hope the new ATG challenge can shed some light on advanced complex theorem proving.