Proofs in proof assistants like Rocq can be brittle, breaking easily in response to changes. To address this, recent work introduced an algorithm and tool in Rocq to automatically repair broken proofs in response to changes that correspond to type equivalences. However, many changes remained out of the scope of this algorithm and tool—especially changes in underlying behavior . We extend this proof repair algorithm so that it can express certain changes in behavior that were previously out of scope. We focus in particular on equivalences between quotient types —types equipped with a relation that describes what it means for any two elements of that type to be equal. Quotient type equivalences can be used to express interesting changes in representations of mathematical structures, as well as changes in the implementations of data structures. We extend this algorithm and tool to support quotient type equivalences in Rocq. Notably, since Rocq lacks quotient types entirely, our extensions use Rocq’s setoid machinery in place of quotients. Specifically, (1) our extension to the algorithm supports new changes corresponding to setoids, and (2) our extension to the tool supports this new class of changes and further automates away some of the new proof obligations. We demonstrate our extensions on proof repair case studies for previously unsupported changes. We also perform manual proof repair in Cubical Agda, a language with a univalent metatheory, which allows us to construct the first ever internal proofs of correctness for proof repair.

Formally verifying system properties is one of the most effective ways of improving system quality, but its high manual effort requirements often render it prohibitively expensive. Tools that automate formal verification by learning from proof corpora to synthesize proofs have just begun to show their promise. These tools are effective because of the richness of the data the proof corpora contain. This richness comes from the stylistic conventions followed by communities of proof developers, together with the powerful logical systems beneath proof assistants. However, this richness remains underexploited, with most work thus far focusing on architecture rather than on how to make the most of the proof data. This article systematically explores how to most effectively exploit one aspect of that proof data: identifiers. We develop the Passport approach, a method for enriching the predictive Coq model used by an existing proof-synthesis tool with three new encoding mechanisms for identifiers: category vocabulary indexing, subword sequence modeling, and path elaboration. We evaluate our approach’s enrichment effect on three existing base tools: ASTactic, Tac, and Tok. In head-to-head comparisons, Passport automatically proves 29% more theorems than the best-performing of these base tools. Combining the three tools enhanced by the Passport approach automatically proves 38% more theorems than combining the three base tools. Finally, together, these base tools and their enhanced versions prove 45% more theorems than the combined base tools. Overall, our findings suggest that modeling identifiers can play a significant role in improving proof synthesis, leading to higher-quality software.

Large language models have the potential to simplify formal theorem proving and make it more accessible. But how to get the most out of these models is still an open question. To answer this question, we take a step back and explore the failure cases of these models using common prompting-based techniques. Our talk will discuss these failure cases and what they can teach us about how to get more out of these models.