Automated Formalization via Conceptual Retrieval-Augmented LLMs
Wangyue Lu, Lun Du, Sirui Li, Ke Weng, Haozhe Sun, Hengyu Liu, Minghe Yu, Tiancheng Zhang, Ge Yu

TL;DR
CRAMF is a retrieval-augmented framework that improves automated formalization in theorem proving by grounding LLMs with a large, structured knowledge base of formal definitions, significantly enhancing accuracy.
Contribution
This work introduces CRAMF, a novel retrieval-augmented formalization framework that constructs a large knowledge base from Mathlib4 and employs advanced retrieval strategies to improve LLM-based formalization.
Findings
Achieves up to 62.1% accuracy improvement in formalization tasks.
Constructs a knowledge base with over 26,000 definitions and 1,000 core concepts.
Demonstrates consistent accuracy gains across multiple benchmarks.
Abstract
Interactive theorem provers (ITPs) require manual formalization, which is labor-intensive and demands expert knowledge. While automated formalization offers a potential solution, it faces two major challenges: model hallucination (e.g., undefined predicates, symbol misuse, and version incompatibility) and the semantic gap caused by ambiguous or missing premises in natural language descriptions. To address these issues, we propose CRAMF, a Concept-driven Retrieval-Augmented Mathematical Formalization framework. CRAMF enhances LLM-based autoformalization by retrieving formal definitions of core mathematical concepts, providing contextual grounding during code generation. However, applying retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) in this setting is non-trivial due to the lack of structured knowledge bases, the polymorphic nature of mathematical concepts, and the high precision required in…
Peer Reviews
Decision·ICLR 2026 Poster
The motivation of model hallucination and conceptual polymorphism is sound, and the solution through the integration of retrieval and concept-level grounding is persuasive. The ontology-based KB design is novel in the formal reasoning domain and technically sound Experiments are comprehensive, covering multiple datasets (miniF2F, ProofNet), models (GPT-4o, DeepSeek-V3, Herald-7B), and ablations, and the newly released AdvancedMath benchmark adds value to the community. There are consistent gains
1. The conceptual extraction and rewriting modules rely heavily on opaque LLM prompting, I'm curious about the reproducibility and generalization. 2. comparison to premise/statement retrieval specialized for Lean is missing, which makes it hard to situate CRAMF against strongest formal-specific retrievers.
1. The paper precisely identifies two major obstacles in automated formalization—model hallucination and the semantic gap arising from ambiguous or incomplete natural language premises. 2. This paper introduces a concept-level retrieval-augmented generation (RAG) mechanism and builds a concept–definition knowledge base from Mathlib4. 3. This paper demonstrates through experiments on miniF2F, ProofNet, and the newly proposed AdvancedMath benchmark that CRAMF can be seamlessly integrated into LLM-
1. The paper is primarily system-oriented and lacks formal justification or complexity analysis of why the hybrid retrieval pipeline improves semantic grounding. For example, the mapping from informal expressions to formal concepts could benefit from a more rigorous evaluation of ontology precision and recall. 2. The experimental comparison focuses mainly on RAG-style retrievers (e.g., BM25, HyDE), without including other autoformalization-specific retrieval systems 3. While the retrieval strate
- The paper applies RAG to statement formalization tasks, and the retrieved contextual information effectively improves model performance. - Code and benchmark data are provided in supplementary material, supporting reproducibility.
- Lack of novelty. It is already well established that RAG improves performance on knowledge-intensive tasks, and similar ideas have been explored in auto theorem proving and auto formalization in Lean, e.g., ReProver [1], LEGO Prover [2], and recently Hilbert [3]. It is unsurprising that RAG also works in statement formalization. Moreover, key components such as reverse translation of Mathlib4 entities, query enhancement, and dual-pathway hybrid retrieval have already been used in Mathlib retri
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsMathematics, Computing, and Information Processing · Logic, programming, and type systems · Polynomial and algebraic computation
