Recent advancements in large language models (LLMs) have spurred growing interest in automatic theorem proving using Lean4, where effective tree search methods are crucial for navigating the underlying large proof search spaces. While the existing approaches primarily rely on value functions and/or Monte Carlo Tree Search (MCTS), the potential of simpler methods like Best-First Tree Search (BFS) remains underexplored. In this paper, we investigate whether BFS can achieve competitive performance in large-scale theorem proving tasks. We present BFS-Prover, a scalable expert iteration framework, featuring three key innovations. First, we implement strategic data filtering at each expert iteration round, excluding problems solvable via beam search node expansion to focus on harder cases. Second, we improve the sample efficiency of BFS through Direct Preference Optimization (DPO) applied to state-tactic pairs automatically annotated with compiler error feedback, refining the LLM’s policy to prioritize productive expansions. Third, we employ length normalization in BFS to encourage exploration of deeper proof paths. BFS-Prover achieves a state-of-the-art score of 72.95 on the MiniF2F test set and therefore challenges the perceived necessity of complex tree search methods, demonstrating that BFS can achieve competitive performance when properly scaled.

The advancement of large language models (LLMs) brings notable improvements across various applications, while simultaneously raising concerns about potential private data exposure. One notable capability of LLMs is their ability to form associations between different pieces of information, but this raises concerns when it comes to personally identifiable information (PII). This paper delves into the association capabilities of language models, aiming to uncover the factors that influence their proficiency in associating information. Our study reveals that as models scale up, their capacity to associate entities/information intensifies, particularly when target pairs demonstrate shorter co-occurrence distances or higher co-occurrence frequencies. However, there is a distinct performance gap when associating commonsense knowledge versus PII, with the latter showing lower accuracy. Despite the proportion of accurately predicted PII being relatively small, LLMs still demonstrate the capability to predict specific instances of email addresses and phone numbers when provided with appropriate prompts. These findings underscore the potential risk to PII confidentiality posed by the evolving capabilities of LLMs, especially as they continue to expand in scale and power.

With the rapid advancement of large language models (LLMs), there is a pressing need for a comprehensive evaluation suite to assess their capabilities and limitations. Existing LLM leaderboards often reference scores reported in other papers without consistent settings and prompts, which may inadvertently encourage cherry-picking favored settings and prompts for better results. In this work, we introduce GPT-Fathom, an open-source and reproducible LLM evaluation suite built on top of OpenAI Evals. We systematically evaluate 10+ leading LLMs as well as OpenAI’s legacy models on 20+ curated benchmarks across 7 capability categories, all under aligned settings. Our retrospective study on OpenAI’s earlier models offers valuable insights into the evolutionary path from GPT-3 to GPT-4. Currently, the community is eager to know how GPT-3 progressively improves to GPT-4, including technical details like whether adding code data improves LLM’s reasoning capability, which aspects of LLM capability can be improved by SFT and RLHF, how much is the alignment tax, etc. Our analysis sheds light on many of these questions, aiming to improve the transparency of advanced LLMs.