Skip to content
Log in
Preprint

LeanCSP: A Framework for Certifying Constraint Reformulation and Solving in Lean

Pablo Manrique Stefan Szeider
Jul 2026 · 0 citations · 47 references
Computer Science

TL;DR

This work introduces a framework that addresses both verification levels in the Lean theorem prover, and can be used to prove formulation-level properties, such as equivalence, equisatisfiability, and the correctness of symmetry-breaking constraints, parametrically for entire problem families.

Abstract

Constraint programming is a core technology for solving complex combinatorial problems in scheduling, planning, configuration, and verification. Trusting its results therefore demands guarantees at two levels: that reformulations applied beforehand are semantics-preserving, and that solvers produce correct answers. In this work, we introduce a framework that addresses both verification levels in the Lean theorem prover: it can be used to prove formulation-level properties, such as equivalence, equisatisfiability, and the correctness of symmetry-breaking constraints, parametrically for entire problem families; and to check solver-produced certificates for individual instances via translation backends to external formats such as MiniZinc, SMT-LIB, and OPB. Combining both levels yields an end-to-end workflow that establishes the satisfiability or unsatisfiability of a constraint problem without trusting the external solver. Experimental results show that our framework's verified symmetry breaking also pays off in practice: a single parametric proof per problem family, reused across all instance sizes, reduces solver search effort by a factor of up to 2x10^7, while the entire in-Lean certification stays affordable, taking at most a few minutes for our largest instances.

arXiv Semantic Scholar
View source

Similar papers

Preprint Jul 2026

Foundational Constraint Solving for Expressive Refinement Typing

FLEX is presented, a foundational Constrained Horn Clause (CHC) solver implemented in LEAN, that reduces the trusted base to the kernel alone, and allows using LEAN's entire proof ecosystem to verify low-level systems code, via three contributions.

J. Khan, Petros Markopoulos, Nicolás Lehmann et al. · 0 citations
Preprint Aug 2026

FLARE: Verifying MILP Reformulations with LLM-Based Theorem Proving

Mixed-Integer Linear Programming (MILP) is a fundamental tool for combinatorial optimization with extensive real-world applications. A central challenge is designing computationally efficient MILP formulations. Large Language Models (LLMs) offer new opportunities to automate the modeling process, from deriving formulations to strengthening them. Reliable automation requires robust methods for verifying that proposed formulations preserve the underlying optimization problem. However, existing approaches evaluate formulations numerically and fail to reason about general problem instances. We resolve this limitation by introducing a constructive definition of MILP reformulation that can be formalized in Lean and machine-checked. We develop FLARE (Formulation-Level Automated Reformulation Evaluation), a method that uses an LLM-based agent and the Lean proof assistant to verify proposed reformulations against a reference formulation. To evaluate our approach, we introduce FormulationBench, a challenging dataset of 20 problems and 109 formulations. FLARE outperforms existing methods, with 100% accuracy on the NP-hard subset of FormulationBench. Furthermore, FLARE produces a machine-checkable certificate for every reformulation it accepts. For cases where formal guarantees are not necessary, we introduce FLARE-NL, a fast and cheap LLM proxy that matches FLARE's accuracy but produces no certificate. These methods enable reliable verification in automated optimization modeling.

Henry W Robbins, Connor Lawless, Madeleine Udell et al. · 0 citations
Conference 2026

From LLM Suggestions to Lean Proofs: Verified Redundant Constraints for MiniZinc

This work presents a pipeline that combines LLM-based constraint generation with empirical evaluation and formal verification, and handles MiniZinc’s partial semantics by requiring the base model to be safe and separately proving that the proposed constraint is well-defined for all instances and solutions of the base model.

Philipp Danzinger, Nysret Musliu · 0 citations