[hiq]

I'm realizing I don't know if it's currently harder for an LLM to: * come up with a formal proof that checks out according to a theorem prover * come up with a classical proof that's valid at a high-level, with roughly the same correctness as human-written papers

Is this known?

[pama]

The advantage of the formal proof is that the LLM in a loop can know that it failed and keep trying.