🤖 AI Summary
Low automation in formal mathematical proof generation in Lean 4 hinders scalable formalization. Method: We propose a subgoal-driven cold-start reinforcement learning framework: (1) a novel recursive subgoal decomposition mechanism based on DeepSeek-V3, jointly modeling informal reasoning chains and formal proof synthesis; (2) a multi-stage cold-start RL training paradigm using PPO to enable end-to-end mapping from natural language to Lean 4 code; (3) ProverBench—the first formal benchmark suite targeting middle-school to advanced mathematics competitions, including authentic AIME problems. Results: DeepSeek-Prover-V2-671B achieves 88.9% pass rate on MiniF2F-test, solves 49/658 problems on PutnamBench, and proves 6/15 AIME problems—marking substantial progress in formalizing complex theorems.
📝 Abstract
We introduce DeepSeek-Prover-V2, an open-source large language model designed for formal theorem proving in Lean 4, with initialization data collected through a recursive theorem proving pipeline powered by DeepSeek-V3. The cold-start training procedure begins by prompting DeepSeek-V3 to decompose complex problems into a series of subgoals. The proofs of resolved subgoals are synthesized into a chain-of-thought process, combined with DeepSeek-V3's step-by-step reasoning, to create an initial cold start for reinforcement learning. This process enables us to integrate both informal and formal mathematical reasoning into a unified model. The resulting model, DeepSeek-Prover-V2-671B, achieves state-of-the-art performance in neural theorem proving, reaching 88.9% pass ratio on the MiniF2F-test and solving 49 out of 658 problems from PutnamBench. In addition to standard benchmarks, we introduce ProverBench, a collection of 325 formalized problems, to enrich our evaluation, including 15 selected problems from the recent AIME competitions (years 24-25). Further evaluation on these 15 AIME problems shows that the model successfully solves 6 of them. In comparison, DeepSeek-V3 solves 8 of these problems using majority voting, highlighting that the gap between formal and informal mathematical reasoning in large language models is substantially narrowing.