Using Aristotle API for AI-Assisted Theorem Proving in Lean 4: A Formalisation Case Study of the Grasshopper Problem

AI-assisted theorem proving can now generate substantial Lean developments for olympiad-level mathematics, but the evidential status of such developments depends on which declarations are actually verified. This paper reports a Lean 4 formalization case study of an Aristotle API proof attempt for the Grasshopper problem, originally posed as IMO 2009 Problem 6. The generated artifact states a generalized Lean version of the theorem, contains four verified helper lemmas for local components of a maximality and adjacent-swap exchange strategy, and leaves the main theorem grasshopper closed directly by one unresolved sorry. The verified components establish that the final partial sum equals the total sum, that an adjacent transposition can affect only the relevant intermediate partial sum, that the changed partial sum has the expected form, and that maximality at a position admitting an adjacent successor swap forces a corresponding forbidden-set membership fact. The Aristotle output summary identifies the intended remaining mathematical step as the global counting step needed to show that these membership facts produce at least n distinct forbidden values, contradicting the cardinality assumption |M|<n; the Lean source itself does not reduce the main theorem to a separately encoded counting lemma. This case study gives an inspectable example of a central limitation in AI-assisted formalization, namely that local proof search can succeed while the global combinatorial bookkeeping required for a theorem remains unresolved. The paper contributes a reproducible Lean artifact and a precise analysis of its verified and unverified proof content.

Paper

References (15)

07Individual results2009 · www
08IMO 2009 Q6 as a mini-polymath project2009 · terrytao.
09The mathlib CommunityMathlib4: The Lean Mathematical Library
10If using a maximality, exchange, or graph-theoretic argument, clearly define the object being optimised and prove why the chosen object must satisfy the required avoidance property
11If using induction, carefully justify the reduction step, especially how the forbidden set changes
12The Lean Language Referencelean-lang.org/doc/reference/latest/Tactic-Proofs/Tactic-Reference/

Scroll for more · 3 remaining

Similar papers

© 2026 NYSGPT2525 LLC