跳到正文
研踪PaperTrail
← 研踪 PaperTrail

arXiv:2606.00671 · v4

Moxia: A Trust-First Neuro-Symbolic Execution Architecture for Self-Explaining Mathematical Reasoning

首次提交 2026-05-30 18:55
版本更新 2026-11-09 00:42
雷达观测 2026-11-10 12:16
arXiv ↗PDF ↗

摘要

We present Moxia, a trust-first neuro-symbolic architecture for self-explaining mathematical reasoning over natural-language input. Its language model is strictly a canonicalizer: it rewrites informal problem text into a narrow schema consumed by a deterministic Computer-Algebra-System (CAS) pipeline, which derives the answer or abstains as a first-class output. Routing follows a 1:1:1 alignment of problem-shape regex, schema-specific prompt, and closed-form handler: 5,741 routes, 75.9% of which answer without invoking the model, with zero LOST_CORRECT regressions as a standing release gate. Because the answer is derived, so is its explanation, rendered from the steps the handler took; where the derivation fits a fragment of Lean 4 with Mathlib, the same declared data become a theorem the kernel checks. On the full 5,000-record MATH test split, designed against, Moxia answers 95.6% (4,780/5,000) with zero confident-wrong answers and abstains, saying where, on the other 220; its MATH-500 subset reads 95.2% (476/500), also with zero wrong. Earlier versions called MATH-500 held out; it is a subset of the test split, and this version says so. We release the run record by record: the problem, the expected answer, the model's transcription, the answer or abstention, the explanation, and the Lean theorem marked as compiled. 3,142 of the 4,780 correct answers carry a theorem, and all 3,142 compile; building the theorems actually served, not only a fixture corpus, found seven that did not, two of them false statements beside correct answers, all repaired before release. What we emphasize is not an accuracy figure but the forward dynamic: every logged abstain is a candidate correct after one ship cycle, since new tasks compose without regressing the registry.

作者备注:Preprint. 17 pages, 2 figures. Live interactive demo: https://huggingface.co/spaces/Squagghy/moxia. Paper, and the benchmark run released record by record (with explanations and compiled Lean theorems), on Zenodo (concept-DOI): 10.5281/zenodo.20128039

AI 论文解读

基于摘要 · 非全文审阅

此版本尚未生成 AI 解读。解读由后台任务生成并按论文版本保存,登录后共享已有结果。

版本差异

目前只观测到一个版本,无法比较变化。之后收录新版本时,会在这里对照标题、作者、分类和摘要。

观测到的版本

相邻记录可能跳过中间版本;首次发现 v2 及以上也会标为版本更新。

v4 · 2026-11-09 00:42 · 最新观测版本

Moxia: A Trust-First Neuro-Symbolic Execution Architecture for Self-Explaining Mathematical Reasoning

We present Moxia, a trust-first neuro-symbolic architecture for self-explaining mathematical reasoning over natural-language input. Its language model is strictly a canonicalizer: it rewrites informal problem text into a narrow schema consumed by a deterministic Computer-Algebra-System (CAS) pipeline, which derives the answer or abstains as a first-class output. Routing follows a 1:1:1 alignment of problem-shape regex, schema-specific prompt, and closed-form handler: 5,741 routes, 75.9% of which answer without invoking the model, with zero LOST_CORRECT regressions as a standing release gate. Because the answer is derived, so is its explanation, rendered from the steps the handler took; where the derivation fits a fragment of Lean 4 with Mathlib, the same declared data become a theorem the kernel checks. On the full 5,000-record MATH test split, designed against, Moxia answers 95.6% (4,780/5,000) with zero confident-wrong answers and abstains, saying where, on the other 220; its MATH-500 subset reads 95.2% (476/500), also with zero wrong. Earlier versions called MATH-500 held out; it is a subset of the test split, and this version says so. We release the run record by record: the problem, the expected answer, the model's transcription, the answer or abstention, the explanation, and the Lean theorem marked as compiled. 3,142 of the 4,780 correct answers carry a theorem, and all 3,142 compile; building the theorems actually served, not only a fixture corpus, found seven that did not, two of them false statements beside correct answers, all repaired before release. What we emphasize is not an accuracy figure but the forward dynamic: every logged abstain is a candidate correct after one ship cycle, since new tasks compose without regressing the registry.

查看此版本解读 →查看此版本原文 ↗