Benchmark Almanac

FormalMATH

DeepSeek-Prover-V2-671B 28.3% Only in system cards

Provers write Lean 4 proofs for 5,560 formal statements from high-school olympiad problems to undergraduate theorems. The Lean checker scores each proof.

FormalMATH-Lite is a 425-problem subset for test-time scaling runs. Its scores are not comparable with the full set.

In the authors’ words

Formal mathematical reasoning remains a critical challenge for artificial intelligence, hindered by limitations of existing benchmarks in scope and scale. To address this, we present FormalMATH, a large-scale Lean4 benchmark comprising 5,560 formally verified problems spanning from high-school Olympiad challenges to undergraduate-level theorems across diverse domains (e.g., algebra, applied mathematics, calculus, number theory, and discrete mathematics). To mitigate the inefficiency of manual formalization, we introduce a novel human-in-the-loop autoformalization pipeline that integrates: (1) specialized large language models (LLMs) for statement autoformalization, (2) multi-LLM semantic verification, and (3) negation-based disproof filtering strategies using off-the-shelf LLM-based provers. This approach reduces expert annotation costs by retaining 72.09% of statements before manual verification while ensuring fidelity to the original natural-language problems. Our evaluation of state-of-the-art LLM-based theorem provers reveals significant limitations: even the strongest models achieve only 16.46% success rate under practical sampling budgets, exhibiting pronounced domain bias (e.g., excelling in algebra but failing in calculus) and over-reliance on simplified automation tactics. Notably, we identify a counterintuitive inverse relationship between natural-language solution guidance and proof success in chain-of-thought reasoning scenarios, suggesting that human-written informal reasoning introduces noise rather than clarity in the formal reasoning settings. We believe that FormalMATH provides a robust benchmark for benchmarking formal mathematical reasoning.

Abstract of FormalMATH: Benchmarking Formal Mathematical Reasoning of Large Language Models (arXiv:2505.02735, CC0)
Made by SphereLab , M-A-P , The Chinese University of Hong Kong , Numina and others Released May 2025 Formal proofs All tasks public Last in a system card Apr 2025 Last model added Apr 2025
Level
Competition The strongest students, in olympiad-style contests
Scored
Checked automatically A program checks the result against an answer key, unit tests or the expected final state.
Answers
Written proof
1
Model scored in lab cards
1
System card reports it, from 1 lab

DeepSeek-Prover-V2-671B leads with 28.3%

Best score per model as labs report them in their own cards. Labs pick their own settings, so these compare less cleanly than independent runs.

  1. 1 DeepSeek-Prover-V2-671B 28.3%
#ModelScoreSettingDateSource
1 DeepSeek-Prover-V2-671B 28.3% Apr 2025 Model card

Scores over time

All the scores we have, one dot each, so a model tested at several settings appears more than once.

Reported by the lab in its model card
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 Near the ceiling (85%) DeepSeek-Prover-V2-671B 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2025 Near the ceiling (85%) DeepSeek-Prover-V2-671B

Labs report it only in system cards

We read the headline results of 479 launch posts from 51 labs, and none of them list this benchmark. Some system cards do, below.

One system card reports it

Besides launch posts, we read the system cards, model cards and technical reports labs publish with a release. They report far more, including safety and frontier-risk tests.

DateDocumentScoreAs the document writes itSection
30 Apr 2025 DeepSeek-Prover-V2-671B technical report 28.3 FormalMATH-All Pass@32, CoT (Table 6). FormalMATH-Lite Pass@32 56.00, Pass@3200 61.88 Capabilities

More in Math

All 105 in Math
  • IMO-AnswerBench In use 400 olympiad problems with short verifiable answers, robustified against memorization. Scored by answer match. GLM-5.2 91%
  • AIME 2026 In use Models solve the 30 integer-answer problems from the 2026 AIME I and II math competitions. Scored by exact answer match. GPT-5.5 100%
  • HMMT 2026 In use Models solve the 33 final-answer problems from the February 2026 Harvard-MIT Mathematics Tournament. Scored by exact answer match. GPT-5.5 98.5%
  • MathArena (Apex, IMO, USAMO) In use Evaluates models on newly released math competitions after release. Final-answer or human/LLM-judged proof scores. Claude Opus 4.8 81.3%
  • PolyMath In use Models solve 9,000 parallel math problems in 18 languages across four difficulty levels, from school math to frontier math. Final answers are checked. Qwen3.7-Max 86.5%
  • USAMO 2026 In use Models write full proofs for the six problems of the 2026 USA Mathematical Olympiad. Judges grade each proof from 0 to 7 against rubrics. GPT-5.5 98.2%