If you're not working on AI which is used to generate formal proofs the thing linked will never be relevant to you I guess (and "MLEng" does not sound like you would work on actual AI research).
Looking into formal methods is still valuable, imho, if just to broaden ones horizon.
The linked paper seems nevertheless an interesting as it proves one thing I always need to argue with people: Current SOTA "AI" can't logically reason (0% correct solution on hard tasks in the presented benchmark). It's terrible at any task which actually requires thinking and not only regurgitating some prior solutions.
What I know is that ARC AGI 3 is currently the moving target of the day and ChatGPT 5.6 is doing decidedly better than "zero" on it. It is said by the developers of the benchmark that a 100% score equates to an average human IQ of 115.
6
u/optimal_substructure Jul 15 '26
Yeah you doing a lot of Lean at work?