3 ms·
These kind of LLMs are also very interesting for software engineering. It's just a matter of replacing Lean with something that is more oriented towards proving
by nextos 2y ago
These kind of LLMs are also very interesting for software engineering. It's just a matter of replacing Lean with something that is more oriented towards proving software properties.
For example, write a formal specification of a function in Dafny on Liquid Haskell and get the LLM to produce code that is formally guaranteed to be correct. Logic-based + probability-based ML.
All GOFAI ideas are still very useful.
- lucioperca 2y agoYou can also verify software like compilers in Lean: https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/opensource/lean-into-verified-software-development/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/opensource/lean-into-verified-s...
- nextos 2y agoSure, but Lean has very little support for software problems compared to Isabelle, Coq or Dafny right now. Those 3 also have a lot of training data as well. Hoping Lean gets more support as it is very friendly. As a basic learning resource focused on software engineering, there's [1]. But nothing more advanced I am aware of. [1] The Hitchhiker's Guide to Logical Verification. https://cs.brown.edu/courses/cs1951x/static_files/main.pdf https://cs.brown.edu/courses/cs1951x/static_files/main.pdf