We report a machine-verified resolution of a problem open for over a decade in quantum optimization: the Farhi, Goldstone and Gutmann (FGG) conjecture that depth-$p$ Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA) on the ring of disagrees attains approximation ratio $(2p+1)/(2p+2)$ exactly. We found the proof using a large language model, Claude Fable 5, and verified its correctness end-to-end by the Lean 4 proof assistant. Our methodology includes several ingredients: building on a substantial Lean library of quantum information, we formalized the QAOA components and the known parts of the problem, and reduced the conjecture to a single open mathematical statement. The model was then handed the library and our agentic toolkit, and tasked with closing that gap by constructing a proof in Lean. The resulting process is a feedback loop between the model's natural-language reasoning and Lean's mechanical verification, which converged to a machine-verified proof. Human verification is required only for the structural scaffolding - that the formal statement faithfully encodes the intended claim - while the proof itself is supplied by the model and certified mechanically by Lean. The proof is nevertheless striking - the model uncovered a hidden dynamical symmetry of the problem and exploited it, borrowing tools and machinery from an adjacent field to turn a hard existence problem into an explicit construction. This work paves the way for resolving open conjectures in quantum information science and beyond.
We report a machine-verified resolution of a problem open for over a decade in quantum optimization: the Farhi, Goldstone and Gutmann (FGG) conjecture that depth-p Quantum Approximate Optimization Algorithm (QAOA) on the ring of disagrees attains approximation ratio (2p+1)/(2p+2) exactly. We found the proof using a large language model, Claude Fable 5, and verified its correctness end-to-end by the Lean 4 proof assistant. Our methodology includes several ingredients: building on a substantial Lean library of quantum information, we formalized the QAOA components and the known parts of the problem, and reduced the conjecture to a single open mathematical statement. The model was then handed the library and our agentic toolkit, and tasked with closing that gap by constructing a proof in Lean. The resulting process is a feedback loop between the model's natural-language reasoning and Lean's mechanical verification, which converged to a machine-verified proof. Human verification is required only for the structural scaffolding - that the formal statement faithfully encodes the intended claim - while the proof itself is supplied by the model and certified mechanically by Lean. The proof is nevertheless striking - the model uncovered a hidden dynamical symmetry of the problem and exploited it, borrowing tools and machinery from an adjacent field to turn a hard existence problem into an explicit construction. This work paves the way for resolving open conjectures in quantum information science and beyond.
Large language models are increasingly assisting with demanding formal theorem-proving tasks, particularly when grounded in machine-checked libraries such as Lean. Agentic systems further amplify this process by searching, reusing, and extending existing formal developments to uncover new discoveries. In quantum computing, Shor's algorithm and its variants present such a demanding case for Lean formalization. In this work, we formalize this algorithm family in Lean through agentic formalization: software agents analyze sources, write Lean code and repair proofs, with human review of the scientific claims and machine checking of the resulting formal proofs. Our formalization develops the mathematical foundations for analyzing quantum attacks in two cryptographic settings: a 2048-bit modulus in the RSA-2048 and the standardized elliptic curve over a 256-bit prime field (P-256). To support these analyses, the formalization ranges from quantum algorithms for order finding to reversible quantum circuits for modular and elliptic-curve arithmetic. Based on [Quantum 5, 433] and [ASIACRYPT 2017, 241--270], we formalize the logical resource estimates for RSA-2048 and P-256, respectively, and provide additional estimates of classical operations. We expect the results pave the way for broader machine-checked quantum cryptanalysis and represent a step toward AI-assisted design and verification of quantum algorithms.
AI agents are increasingly capable of constructing quantum algorithms and proofs, yet machine-checked proofs alone cannot guarantee that the intended problem is solved or that resource claims match the verified computation. Here we introduce Lean-QuantumAlg, a Lean 4 framework for trustworthy AI-assisted development of quantum algorithms. Its Algorithm-Solves-Problem contract binds correctness, success probability, borrowed-state restoration and quantum and classical resource bounds to a single execution, while separating the guarantees that Lean checks from the problem specifications and execution models that humans review. We demonstrate the framework on nine AI-formalized quantum algorithms, from Grover search to quantum attacks on RSA-2048 and P-256, with less than 1% of each algorithm's imported source code requiring statement-level human review once the shared framework has been audited. By integrating reusable mathematical foundations, certified algorithmic primitives and execution-grounded verification, Lean-QuantumAlg provides a basis for AI agents to construct and certify quantum algorithms, opening a path toward scalable AI-driven discovery of quantum algorithms.
Practical quantum programs interleave quantum and classical computation: classical data shape the quantum operations that are performed, and measurement outcomes shape the classical computation that follows. Formal verification of such programs in a proof assistant requires mechanizing a program logic that handles this interplay consistently at every level, from the mathematics of quantum mechanics, through program syntax and semantics, to specifications and proof rules. Such mechanizations, along with the program proofs built on them, typically require substantial manual effort.
We present QEDIA, a framework for verifying quantum programs with classical variables in Lean 4. At its foundation is an open library that formalizes the quantum Hoare logic QHL+ across all these levels and proves the logic sound for both partial and total correctness. We construct the library and the program proofs, under human supervision, using an LLM-based prover agent, whose general-purpose core we extend for quantum program verification. We illustrate QEDIA with verified programs including the quantum Fourier transform, phase estimation, repeat-until-success circuits, and Hamiltonian simulation.
Quantum error-correcting codes (QECCs) sit between noisy quantum hardware and reliable computation, so the code parameters used in practice must be trustworthy. The single number that summarizes a code's strength is its distance, yet certifying a distance lower bound is NP-hard in general, placing it beyond the reach of pen-and-paper proofs as well as direct proof-assistant scripting. As a result, distance values in the literature come either from non-scaling hand proofs, or from unverified solvers that leave a trust gap exactly where the code is supposed to provide a guarantee. We present Lean-QEC, the first Lean 4 formalization of stabilizer-code theory that delivers end-to-end, machine-checked distance certificates at industrial code sizes. Lean-QEC formalizes the linear algebra of qubit states, the Pauli group, stabilizer codes, the binary symplectic representation, classical coding theory, and the CSS and Bivariate Bicycle families. To break the combinatorial barrier, Lean-QEC translates the distance condition into a Boolean satisfiability formula through a verified reduction. The pipeline scales through a BitVec-flattened encoding that replaces Lean's Matrix representation, and an error-location encoding that reduces the variable count from n to k⌈log2n⌉. With these, we obtain automatically-generated Lean-checked distance proofs for a large range of industrially viable qLDPC codes within the Bivariate Bicycle and Generalized Bicycle families, including [[90, 8, 10]] and [[70, 6, 9]] BB codes, with the formulation scaling up to 144 qubits when performed outside the Lean kernel. The resulting library is reusable and is designed to plug into broader Lean-based efforts toward end-to-end verification of fault-tolerant quantum computation.
Quantum key distribution provides secure communication by relying on physics principles and mathematical reasoning. Security proofs across the field can contain gaps, often between individually valid theorems integrated under mismatched assumptions. We produce an end-to-end security theorem formalized in the Lean proof assistant, eliminating hidden hypotheses by building only on Lean's standard axioms. Our proof covers composable security of the entanglement-based qubit BB84 protocol against coherent attacks by the postselection technique, accounting for finite block size, and is written in a language that enforces local operations and classical communication to help ensure a faithful representation of the protocol. The proof itself was enabled by LLM-based autoformalization, and with the proof complete, we used the same pipeline as a discovery machine, reducing the finite-size penalty on the key rate. Our work sets a reproducible standard for security arguments in quantum cryptography and shows how formal proof engines can accelerate discovery across quantum information science.
Formal verification is becoming increasingly practical for quantum computing, yet the ability of AI agents to construct machine-checkable proofs in this domain remains unmeasured. We introduce Lean-QuantumAlg-Bench and Lean-QIT-Bench, two Lean 4 benchmarks containing 36 and 40 theorem-completion tasks for quantum algorithms and quantum information theory, respectively. Every task compiles in a fixed environment and is evaluated by deterministic proof checking and targeted semantic review, with difficulty weights assigned before model execution. We evaluate four models-GPT-5.5, Kimi K3, DeepSeek V4-Pro, and MiniMax M3-within a common theorem-proving framework under two settings: a task-only baseline and library-augmented deduction (LAD), which additionally provides access to a verified domain library. The highest difficulty-weighted scores are 60.4 out of 100 on the quantum-algorithm benchmark and 59.6 out of 100 on the quantum-information benchmark. LAD improves both score and completion rate in all eight model-benchmark comparisons, with gains of up to 15.9 points, providing evidence that verified libraries can strengthen domain-specific proof agents. The results reveal recurring weaknesses of agentic proving in areas such as quantum simulation, quantum learning, quantum information measures, and entanglement theory. Monetary and wall-clock costs per score point also vary substantially across models, highlighting important capability-efficiency trade-offs. We expect these benchmarks to establish a reproducible baseline for developing more capable and reliable proof agents, and to pave the way toward self-evolving AI scientists for advancing quantum information science.