A Certificate-Producing Cascade for Equational Implication: The SAIR EQT2 Stage 2 Solver

arXiv:2609.00706 · cs.CL · Submitted 2026-09-01 · Read on arXiv

cs.CL

Submitted: 2026-09-01

Updated: 2026-09-01

Comments: 12 pages

Code: https://github.com/teorth/equational_theories

License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

The gist: The SAIR Mathematics Distillation Challenge on Equational Theories asks a solver to classify whether one magma identity implies another and, for either verdict, to return a certificate accepted by a

Terminology

Abstract

The SAIR Mathematics Distillation Challenge on Equational Theories asks a solver to classify whether one magma identity implies another and, for either verdict, to return a certificate accepted by a deterministic Lean judge. We present a single-file solver organized as a cheapest-first cascade. Its false branch combines coefficient tests over structured algebra families, bounded finite-model search, an explicit central-groupoid witness, and several infinite-carrier witnesses. Its true branch is a proof-producing ordered unit superposition procedure with Knuth-Bendix ordering, bidirectional demodulation, indexing, memoised substitution, and anytime size deepening. Search results remain outside the trusted base: successful derivations are replayed as small Lean terms, and countermodels are rechecked by the competition judge. The frozen solver is a 189,504-byte Python file with SHA-256 f2392533c9f4c03b.... In local runs through official judge revision 2848228, it produced accepted certificates for all 1,889 rows of the six public sets with no language-model calls. Separate measurements recorded full agreement on the 800 published Stage 1 evaluation-distribution problems, 100 accepted rows in the canonical Marathon manifest without tokens, and 200 accepted rows in the hosted playground. These are regression and playground measurements, not a leaderboard result and not evidence about a hidden set. All quantitative claims are tied to immutable result ledgers; the paper makes no completeness or comparative-superiority claim.

Sources

Related papers