Lf-lean: The frontier of verified software engineering
1–10 of 12 posts
Re: Lf-lean: The frontier of verified software engineering
#2Re: Lf-lean: The frontier of verified software engineering
#3Is this impressive? They just ported a bunch of theorems/proofs already written in Rocq into Lean. Also Logical Foundations is just a Rocq tutorial with the basics. An absolutely amazing tutorial and probably the best resource out there. But I'm not surprised AI can do that.
Re: Lf-lean: The frontier of verified software engineering
#4Is this impressive? They just ported a bunch of theorems/proofs already written in Rocq into Lean. Also Logical Foundations is just a Rocq tutorial with the basics. An absolutely amazing tutorial and probably the best resource out there. But I'm not surprised AI can do that.
Impressive if for no other reason than there are various disparate formally verified projects (seL4, compcert, certikos) that could potentially be unified under a single proof system. Additionally it may be possible to quickly extend existing proofs (e.g. seL4's proofs) to other architectures.
Re: Lf-lean: The frontier of verified software engineering
#5Is this impressive? They just ported a bunch of theorems/proofs already written in Rocq into Lean. Also Logical Foundations is just a Rocq tutorial with the basics. An absolutely amazing tutorial and probably the best resource out there. But I'm not surprised AI can do that.
Re: Lf-lean: The frontier of verified software engineering
#6Is this impressive? They just ported a bunch of theorems/proofs already written in Rocq into Lean. Also Logical Foundations is just a Rocq tutorial with the basics. An absolutely amazing tutorial and probably the best resource out there. But I'm not surprised AI can do that.
> produced by frontier AI with ~2 person-days of human effort versus an estimated ~2.75 person-years manually (a 350x speed-up). We achieve this through task-level specification generators...
Re: Lf-lean: The frontier of verified software engineering
#7Re: Lf-lean: The frontier of verified software engineering
#8The exception was [1], a Lean-based text heavily inspired by Concrete Semantics [2], a cornerstone of Isabelle literature. The latter is, in essence, Winskel's classic semantics book [3], a standard textbook in programming language theory, with all proofs mechanically checked.
More broadly, I'm wondering whether dependent types are the right abstraction or too powerful and heavy for humans to review and make sure specifications are aligned with intent. I've been working on automation for this for more than a year, and I've found refinement types sufficient and much easier to review.
[1] https://github.com/lean-forward/logical_verification_2025
[2] http://concrete-semantics.org
[3] https://direct.mit.edu/books/monograph/4338/The-Formal-Seman...
Re: Lf-lean: The frontier of verified software engineering
#9This website is asking me for permissions on my phone. Why?