跳到正文
𝕏 Rohan Paul(x.com)·· 3 小時前品質評分58
重點導讀

Meta 與 NYU 的新研究指出,使用簡單迴圈結合 Lean 工具與額外計算即可匹敵甚至超越手工設計的定理證明工作流程。

  • h1 迴圈:在每次失敗檢查後提供快速 Lean 反饋與搜尋工具,無需事前規劃,僅提供進度摘要。

AI 伴隨問答

自備 Key 深度分析

針對這篇報導有疑問?可直接點選快捷問題或向 AI 追問背景脈絡與技術細節:

Rohan Paul
Rohan Paul@rohanpaul_ai
·3 小時前
𝕏

New Meta, NYU paper shows that a simple loop with good Lean tools and more compute matches or beats hand-built theorem-proving workflows.

Systems that write math proofs in Lean, a language a computer can check, increasingly use hand-designed workflows that plan and split up problems. Their gains often come with stronger models or more compute, hiding what the workflow adds.

They built h1, a loop that gives the model fast Lean feedback and search tools, and keeps it working after each failed check. It imposes no plan, only a progress summary before each new round.

With the same model, h1 beat the hand-built Goedel-Architect on PutnamBench, 598 problems to 597, at $1.08 against $1.47 per problem. The interface still matters: with Opus 4.8, h1 solved 83 of 100 hard algebra problems, against 63 for Claude Code.

推文來源 · X (Twitter)在 X 參與討論