APOLLO: Automated LLM and Lean Collaboration for Advanced Formal Reasoning
Azim Ospanov, Farzan Farnia, Roozbeh Yousefzadeh
Formal reasoning and automated theorem proving constitute a challenging subfield of machine learning, in which machines are tasked with proving mathematical theorems using formal languages like Lean. A formal verification system can check whether a formal proof is correct or not almost instantaneously, but generating a completely correct formal proof with large language models (LLMs) remains a formidable task. The usual approach in the literature is to prompt the LLM many times (up to several thousands) until one of the generated proofs passes the verification system. In this work, we present APOLLO (**A**utomated **P**r**O**of repair via **L**LM and **L**ean c**O**llaboration), a modular, model‑agnostic pipeline that combines the strengths of the Lean compiler with an LLM’s reasoning abilities to achieve better proof‐generation results at a low sampling budget. _Apollo_ directs a fully automated process in which the LLM generates proofs for theorems, a set of agents analyze the proofs, fix the syntax errors, identify the mistakes in the proofs using Lean, isolate failing sub‑lemmas, utilize automated solvers, and invoke an LLM on each remaining goal with a low top‑$K$ budget. The repaired sub‑proofs are recombined and reverified, iterating up to a user‑controlled maximum number of attempts. On the miniF2F benchmark, we establish a new state‑of‑the‑art accuracy of 75.0\% among 7B‑parameter models while keeping the sampling budget below one thousand. Moreover, _Apollo_ raises the state‑of‑the‑art accuracy for Goedel‑Prover‑SFT to 65.6\% while cutting sample complexity from 25,600 to a few hundred. General‑purpose models (o3‑mini, o4‑mini) jump from 3–7\% to over 40\% accuracy. Our results demonstrate that targeted, compiler‑guided repair of LLM outputs yields dramatic gains in both efficiency and correctness, suggesting a general paradigm for scalable automated theorem proving.