Loading
Life sciences · Preprint
arXiv · October 1, 2026
No summary has been generated for this record yet. What follows is drawn from its source metadata only.
Preprint.
No findings were extractable from the material analysed.
Safety was not reported in the material analysed. Check the source before drawing any conclusion about harm.
The source did not state who this applies to in practice.
Graded across the dimensions that decide whether you should act, each from what the source actually supports. There is no single score, and where a dimension was not assessed it says so.
This record has not been graded across any dimension yet. Treat the label above as provisional and read the source.
What is missing. This record has no bottom line, key findings, reported figures, evidence dimensions. That is a gap in the analysis, not a judgement about the study.
Skill evolution offers a promising way to improve large language model agents without updating their parameters, but its use in formal theorem proving remains underexplored. Existing methods mainly target natural-language reasoning, improving skills by analyzing successful and failed trajectories and incrementally revising solving strategies. Although the Lean verifier provides reliable execution feedback, when all sampled trajectories fail, existing skill evolution methods lack successful trajectories from which to infer effective update directions. Furthermore, these methods also focus mainly on the root instruction file, thus underexploring the evolution of reference knowledge including mathematical concepts and proving techniques. To address these limitations, we propose a mutation-enhanced skill self-evolution framework for building skill-augmented Lean provers. The framework jointly evolves a high-level solving policy and its reference knowledge through progressive and mutation-based updates. Progressive evolution derives local improvements from successful and failed trajectories, while mutation is triggered when no complete proof can be generated, sampling mathematical concepts to produce and select new skill candidates under verifier feedback. We evaluate our method on MiniF2F, PutnamBench, the 2025 International Mathematical Olympiad (IMO 2025), and the 2026 USA Mathematical Olympiad (USAMO 2026). Under the same backbone model, trajectorysampling budget, and test-time compute, our method achieves proof success rates of 100.0%, 90.6%, 4/6, and 4/6, respectively, with GPT-5.5, outperforming the baseline methods. Further analysis shows that concept-guided mutation outperforms random-text-guided mutation by 6.9 and 8.2 percentage points on MiniF2F and PutnamBench, respectively, while solving one additional problem on both IMO 2025 and USAMO 2026.