arXiv subjects

Kristian Minchev

Publications and source records attributed to Kristian Minchev.

4 recordsLinked to original sources

arXiv2026

LARP: Learner-Agnostic Robust Data Prefiltering

Public datasets, crucial for modern machine learning and statistical inference, often contain low-quality or contaminated samples that can harm model performance. This creates a need for principled prefiltering procedures that a data provider can apply to protect the accuracy of a range of potential downstream statistical and learning procedures simultaneously. In this work, we formalize and analyze Learner-Agnostic Robust data Prefiltering (LARP), the problem of designing prefiltering procedures with guarantees on the worst-case loss over a pre-specified set of learners. We establish the feasibility of LARP in two theoretical settings, by providing upper-bound guarantees on the worst-case loss. Our theoretical results indicate that protecting heterogeneous learner sets via LARP comes at the price of some performance loss compared to individual, learner-specific prefiltering; we call this gap the price of LARP. To assess this gap in performance, we empirically measure the price of LARP across image and tabular tasks. We further explore potential benefits of LARP from the perspective of saving on repeated data curation efforts, in a game-theoretic model where the downstream learners can split the cost of the single prefiltering.

stat.ML↗

arXiv2026

The Open Proof Corpus: A Large-Scale Study of LLM-Generated Mathematical Proofs

In recent months, large language models (LLMs) have made significant progress in mathematical proof generation, but further advancement is hindered by the lack of a large-scale, high-quality dataset of human-evaluated proofs. While expensive to create, such a dataset is essential for driving improvements in training and enabling a rigorous analysis of proof generation capabilities. In this work, we present the Open Proof Corpus (OPC), a dataset comprising over 5,000 human-evaluated proofs produced by state-of-the-art LLMs. The OPC was specifically designed for broad applicability and downstream usage in proof generation research and is the first to include a substantial number of correct, LLM-generated solutions to problems from prestigious mathematics competitions such as the USAMO and IMO. Using the OPC, we explore critical questions in automated proof generation: (1) the performance gap between natural language and formal proof generation, (2) the discrepancy between final-answer accuracy and full-proof validity, and (3) the impact of best-of-n selection on proof quality. Finally, to showcase the utility of the OPC, we finetune an 8B-parameter model on the dataset, obtaining a model that performs on par with the best model, Gemini-2.5-Pro, on the task of evaluating proof correctness.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Proof or Bluff? Evaluating LLMs on 2025 USA Math Olympiad

Recent math benchmarks for large language models (LLMs) such as MathArena indicate that state-of-the-art reasoning models achieve impressive performance on mathematical competitions like AIME, with the leading model, Gemini-2.5-Pro, achieving scores comparable to top human competitors. However, these benchmarks evaluate models solely based on final numerical answers, neglecting rigorous reasoning and proof generation which are essential for real-world mathematical tasks. To address this, we introduce a comprehensive evaluation of full-solution reasoning for challenging mathematical problems. Using expert human annotators, we evaluated several state-of-the-art reasoning models on the six problems from the 2025 USAMO within hours of their release. Our results reveal that all tested models struggled significantly: only Gemini-2.5-Pro achieves a non-trivial score of 25%, while all other models achieve less than 5%. Through detailed analysis of reasoning traces, we identify the most common failure modes and find several unwanted artifacts arising from the optimization strategies employed during model training. Overall, our results suggest that current LLMs are inadequate for rigorous mathematical reasoning tasks, highlighting the need for substantial improvements in reasoning and proof generation capabilities.

cs.CL↗

arXiv2025

Incentivizing Truthful Collaboration in Heterogeneous Federated Learning

Federated learning (FL) is a distributed collaborative learning method, where multiple clients learn together by sharing gradient updates instead of raw data. However, it is well-known that FL is vulnerable to manipulated updates from clients. In this work we study the impact of data heterogeneity on clients' incentives to manipulate their updates. First, we present heterogeneous collaborative learning scenarios where a client can modify their updates to be better off, and show that these manipulations can lead to diminishing model performance. To prevent such modifications, we formulate a game in which clients may misreport their gradient updates in order to "steer" the server model to their advantage. We develop a payment rule that provably disincentivizes sending modified updates under the FedSGD protocol. We derive explicit bounds on the clients' payments and the convergence rate of the global model, which allows us to study the trade-off between heterogeneity, payments and convergence. Finally, we provide an experimental evaluation of the effectiveness of our payment rule in the FedSGD, median-based aggregation FedSGD and FedAvg protocols on three tasks in computer vision and natural language processing. In all cases we find that our scheme successfully disincentivizes modifications.

cs.LG↗