arXiv subjects

Andreas Florath

Publications and source records attributed to Andreas Florath.

5 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

A Lean-Certified Proof of $K_8(4, 2) = 23$

We prove the exact octonary covering-code value $K_8(4, 2) = 23$ in Lean 4. The upper bound is given by an explicit 23-word radius-two code in $(Fin\:8)^4$ , checked over all $8^4$ ambient words. The lower bound excludes covers with at most 22 words. A fiber-counting and missing-pair argument first rules out covers with at most 21 words. In the remaining 22-word case, the proof reduces a hypothetical cover to six missing-pair graphs coming from the coordinate-pair projections. Fiber-counting arguments constrain these graphs, and two Lean-checked Linear RAT (LRAT) refutations of stored conjunctive-normal-form (CNF) instances force a common 3 + 3 + 2 block structure. This structure is incompatible with a 22-word cover: the two three-symbol components already force 18 codewords, while the remaining two-symbol component would require a binary strength-two array of length four with at most four rows, which is impossible. The result is packaged as a proof-carrying Lean artifact: the explicit upper bound, structural lower bound, CNF instances, and LRAT refutations are checked inside Lean, with no external SAT solver used during proof replay.

cs.IT↗

arXiv2026

Formal Foundations and Proof-Carrying Certificates for q-ary Covering Codes in Lean 4

Covering codes in finite Hamming spaces ask for small sets of words whose Hamming balls cover the whole space. This paper presents a Lean 4 formalization of the elementary theory of q-ary covering codes, centered on certificate predicates for upper bounds, lower bounds, and exact covering numbers $K_q(n,r)$. The formalization proves the q-ary Hamming-ball volume formula, the sphere-covering lower bound, elementary exact cases, product and relation rules, and selected small exact certificates. It also demonstrates an end-to-end workflow for checking explicit upper bounds transcribed from van Laarhoven et al. (1989). The accompanying database is proof-carrying: stored bounds have traces that replay to Lean proofs of the corresponding upper- or lower-bound predicates. The contribution is not new record bounds or a reproduction of known tables, but a reusable, auditable foundation for machine-checked covering-code certificates.

cs.IT↗

arXiv2026

Aletheia-Probe: A Tool for Automated Journal Assessment

Assessing journal legitimacy during literature reviews, publication venue selection, and citation verification requires consulting information scattered across multiple incompatible data-sets. This paper introduces Aletheia-Probe, an open-source tool that systematically aggregates curated databases and pattern analysis from multiple authoritative sources to provide transparent, confidence-scored journal assessments. The tool explicitly reports which sources were consulted, what each found, and where evidence conflicts. The tool integrates into research workflows through command-line and programmatic interfaces. It reduces manual assessment overhead while explicitly flagging uncertain cases. We present the tool's architecture, core design principles, and practical integration approach. Comprehensive empirical validation will be presented in forthcoming work.

cs.DL↗

arXiv2024

Enhancing Formal Theorem Proving: A Comprehensive Dataset for Training AI Models on Coq Code

In the realm of formal theorem proving, the Coq proof assistant stands out for its rigorous approach to verifying mathematical assertions and software correctness. Despite the advances in artificial intelligence and machine learning, the specialized nature of Coq syntax and semantics poses unique challenges for Large Language Models (LLMs). Addressing this gap, we present a comprehensive dataset specifically designed to enhance LLMs' proficiency in interpreting and generating Coq code. This dataset, derived from a collection of over 10,000 Coq source files, encompasses a wide array of propositions, proofs, and definitions, enriched with metadata including source references and licensing information. Our primary aim is to facilitate the development of LLMs capable of generating syntactically correct and semantically meaningful Coq constructs, thereby advancing the frontier of automated theorem proving. Initial experiments with this dataset have showcased its significant potential; models trained on this data exhibited enhanced accuracy in Coq code generation. Notably, a particular experiment revealed that a fine-tuned LLM was capable of generating 141 valid proofs for a basic lemma, highlighting the dataset's utility in facilitating the discovery of diverse and valid proof strategies. This paper discusses the dataset's composition, the methodology behind its creation, and the implications of our findings for the future of machine learning in formal verification. The dataset is accessible for further research and exploration: https://huggingface.co/datasets/florath/coq-facts-props-proofs-gen0-v1

cs.AI↗

arXiv2023

LLM Interactive Optimization of Open Source Python Libraries -- Case Studies and Generalization

With the advent of large language models (LLMs) like GPT-3, a natural question is the extent to which these models can be utilized for source code optimization. This paper presents methodologically stringent case studies applied to well-known open source python libraries pillow and numpy. We find that contemporary LLM ChatGPT-4 (state September and October 2023) is surprisingly adept at optimizing energy and compute efficiency. However, this is only the case in interactive use, with a human expert in the loop. Aware of experimenter bias, we document our qualitative approach in detail, and provide transcript and source code. We start by providing a detailed description of our approach in conversing with the LLM to optimize the _getextrema function in the pillow library, and a quantitative evaluation of the performance improvement. To demonstrate qualitative replicability, we report further attempts on another locus in the pillow library, and one code locus in the numpy library, to demonstrate generalization within and beyond a library. In all attempts, the performance improvement is significant (factor up to 38). We have also not omitted reporting of failed attempts (there were none). We conclude that LLMs are a promising tool for code optimization in open source libraries, but that the human expert in the loop is essential for success. Nonetheless, we were surprised by how few iterations were required to achieve substantial performance improvements that were not obvious to the expert in the loop. We would like bring attention to the qualitative nature of this study, more robust quantitative studies would need to introduce a layer of selecting experts in a representative sample -- we invite the community to collaborate.

cs.SE↗