❌

Normal view

Received — 8 April 2026 ⏭ cs.AI, q-bio.NC updates on arXiv.org

Automated Conjecture Resolution with Formal Verification

arXiv:2604.03789v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Recent advances in large language models have significantly improved their ability to perform mathematical reasoning, extending from elementary problem solving to increasingly capable performance on research-level problems. However, reliably solving and verifying such problems remains challenging due to the inherent ambiguity of natural language reasoning. In this paper, we propose an automated framework for tackling research-level mathematical problems that integrates natural language reasoning with formal verification, enabling end-to-end problem solving with minimal human intervention. Our framework consists of two components: an informal reasoning agent, Rethlas, and a formal verification agent, Archon. Rethlas mimics the workflow of human mathematicians by combining reasoning primitives with our theorem search engine, Matlas, to explore solution strategies and construct candidate proofs. Archon, equipped with our formal theorem search engine LeanSearch, translates informal arguments into formalized Lean 4 projects through structured task decomposition, iterative refinement, and automated proof synthesis, ensuring machine-checkable correctness. Using this framework, we automatically resolve an open problem in commutative algebra and formally verify the resulting proof in Lean 4 with essentially no human involvement. Our experiments demonstrate that strong theorem retrieval tools enable the discovery and application of cross-domain mathematical techniques, while the formal agent is capable of autonomously filling nontrivial gaps in informal arguments. More broadly, our work illustrates a promising paradigm for mathematical research in which informal and formal reasoning systems, equipped with theorem retrieval tools, operate in tandem to produce verifiable results, substantially reduce human effort, and offer a concrete instantiation of human-AI collaborative mathematical research.
Received — 2 April 2026 ⏭ cs.AI, q-bio.NC updates on arXiv.org

Med-CMR: A Fine-Grained Benchmark Integrating Visual Evidence and Clinical Logic for Medical Complex Multimodal Reasoning

arXiv:2512.00818v2 Announce Type: replace Abstract: MLLMs MLLMs are beginning to appear in clinical workflows, but their ability to perform complex medical reasoning remains unclear. We present Med-CMR, a fine-grained Medical Complex Multimodal Reasoning benchmark. Med-CMR distinguishes from existing counterparts by three core features: 1) Systematic capability decomposition, splitting medical multimodal reasoning into fine-grained visual understanding and multi-step reasoning to enable targeted evaluation; 2) Challenging task design, with visual understanding across three key dimensions (small-object detection, fine-detail discrimination, spatial understanding) and reasoning covering four clinically relevant scenarios (temporal prediction, causal reasoning, long-tail generalization, multi-source integration); 3) Broad, high-quality data coverage, comprising 20,653 Visual Question Answering (VQA) pairs spanning 11 organ systems and 12 imaging modalities, validated via a rigorous two-stage (human expert + model-assisted) review to ensure clinical authenticity. We evaluate 18 state-of-the-art MLLMs with Med-CMR, revealing GPT-5 as the top-performing commercial model: 57.81 accuracy on multiple-choice questions (MCQs) and a 48.70 open-ended score, outperforming Gemini 2.5 Pro (49.87 MCQ accuracy, 45.98 open-ended score) and leading open-source model Qwen3-VL-235B-A22B (49.34 MCQ accuracy, 42.62 open-ended score). However, specialized medical MLLMs do not reliably outperform strong general models, and long-tail generalization emerges as the dominant failure mode. Med-CMR thus provides a stress test for visual-reasoning integration and rare-case robustness in medical MLLMs, and a rigorous yardstick for future clinical systems.
Received — 11 March 2026 ⏭ cs.AI, q-bio.NC updates on arXiv.org

aCAPTCHA: Verifying That an Entity Is a Capable Agent via Asymmetric Hardness

arXiv:2603.07116v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: As autonomous AI agents increasingly populate the Internet, a novel security challenge arises: "Is this entity an AI agent?" It is a new entity-type verification problem with no established solution. We formalize the problem through a three-class entity taxonomy (Human, Script, Agent) based on a verifiable agentic capability vector (action, reasoning, and memory). A timing threshold t exploits the asymmetric hardness between human cognition and AI processing to separate the three classes. We define the Agentic Capability Verification Problem (ACVP) through three necessity primitives, each testing one capability dimension. Building on this foundation, we introduce aCAPTCHA (Agent CAPTCHA), a time-constrained security game for agent admission whose security rests on ACVP hardness under t. We instantiate aCAPTCHA through time-bounded natural-language understanding as a multi-round HTTP verification protocol, and evaluate it with preliminary agent trials that validate the protocol's soundness and completeness. aCAPTCHA provides a composable, infrastructure-free admission gate for any service where entity-type verification is required.
  • ✇cs.AI, q-bio.NC updates on arXiv.org
  • Aligning to Illusions: Choice Blindness in Human and AI Feedback Wenbin Wu
    arXiv:2603.08412v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) assumes annotator preferences reflect stable internal states. We challenge this through three experiments spanning the preference pipeline. In a human choice blindness study, 91% of surreptitiously swapped preferences go undetected, extending choice blindness to third-person evaluative comparison of unfamiliar text. Testing fifteen LLM judges as potential replacements, we find detection relies on
     

Aligning to Illusions: Choice Blindness in Human and AI Feedback

arXiv:2603.08412v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Reinforcement Learning from Human Feedback (RLHF) assumes annotator preferences reflect stable internal states. We challenge this through three experiments spanning the preference pipeline. In a human choice blindness study, 91% of surreptitiously swapped preferences go undetected, extending choice blindness to third-person evaluative comparison of unfamiliar text. Testing fifteen LLM judges as potential replacements, we find detection relies on shallow text matching rather than genuine self-monitoring: removing prior reasoning from context causes blindness to surge from near-zero to over 50%, while explicit social pressure induces near-universal compliance. In a dose-response experiment across two architectures from 86M to 2B parameters, one-sixth to one-third of labels must be corrupted before the reward signal halves, yet standard pairwise accuracy remains virtually unchanged. A Best-of-N evaluation confirms this translates to downstream policy degradation: at 50% corruption, reward-guided selection produces no improvement over random sampling, while the proxy model reports monotonically increasing scores. Together, these results reveal a preference construction problem: the signal entering RLHF is shaped by elicitation context in ways that neither human metacognition, LLM self-monitoring, nor standard evaluation metrics can detect.
Received — 17 February 2026 ⏭ cs.AI, q-bio.NC updates on arXiv.org

InnoEval: On Research Idea Evaluation as a Knowledge-Grounded, Multi-Perspective Reasoning Problem

arXiv:2602.14367v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The rapid evolution of Large Language Models has catalyzed a surge in scientific idea production, yet this leap has not been accompanied by a matching advance in idea evaluation. The fundamental nature of scientific evaluation needs knowledgeable grounding, collective deliberation, and multi-criteria decision-making. However, existing idea evaluation methods often suffer from narrow knowledge horizons, flattened evaluation dimensions, and the inherent bias in LLM-as-a-Judge. To address these, we regard idea evaluation as a knowledge-grounded, multi-perspective reasoning problem and introduce InnoEval, a deep innovation evaluation framework designed to emulate human-level idea assessment. We apply a heterogeneous deep knowledge search engine that retrieves and grounds dynamic evidence from diverse online sources. We further achieve review consensus with an innovation review board containing reviewers with distinct academic backgrounds, enabling a multi-dimensional decoupled evaluation across multiple metrics. We construct comprehensive datasets derived from authoritative peer-reviewed submissions to benchmark InnoEval. Experiments demonstrate that InnoEval can consistently outperform baselines in point-wise, pair-wise, and group-wise evaluation tasks, exhibiting judgment patterns and consensus highly aligned with human experts.

CoCoDiff: Correspondence-Consistent Diffusion Model for Fine-grained Style Transfer

arXiv:2602.14464v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: Transferring visual style between images while preserving semantic correspondence between similar objects remains a central challenge in computer vision. While existing methods have made great strides, most of them operate at global level but overlook region-wise and even pixel-wise semantic correspondence. To address this, we propose CoCoDiff, a novel training-free and low-cost style transfer framework that leverages pretrained latent diffusion models to achieve fine-grained, semantically consistent stylization. We identify that correspondence cues within generative diffusion models are under-explored and that content consistency across semantically matched regions is often neglected. CoCoDiff introduces a pixel-wise semantic correspondence module that mines intermediate diffusion features to construct a dense alignment map between content and style images. Furthermore, a cycle-consistency module then enforces structural and perceptual alignment across iterations, yielding object and region level stylization that preserves geometry and detail. Despite requiring no additional training or supervision, CoCoDiff delivers state-of-the-art visual quality and strong quantitative results, outperforming methods that rely on extra training or annotations.
❌