LongCat-Flash-Prover: Advancing Native Formal Reasoning via Agentic Tool-Integrated Reinforcement Learning
Authors: name: Jianing Wang, name: Jianfei Zhang, name: Qi Guo, name: Linsen Guo, name: Rumei Li, name: Chao Zhang, name: Chong Peng, name: Cunguang Wang, name: Dengchang Zhao, name: Jiarong Shi, name: Jingang Wang, name: Liulin Feng, name: Mengxia Shen, name: Qi Li, name: Shengnan An, name: Shun Wang, name: Wei Shi, name: Xiangyu Xi, name: Xiaoyu Li, name: Xuezhi Cao, name: Yi Lu, name: Yunke Zhao, name: Zhengyu Chen, name: Zhimin Lin, name: Wei Wang, name: Peng Pei, name: Xunliang Cai
Organization: LongCat

We introduce LongCat-Flash-Prover, a flagship 560-billion-parameter open-source Mixture-of- Experts (MoE) model that advances Native Formal Reasoning in Lean4 through agentic tool-integrated reasoning (TIR). We decompose the native formal reasoning task into three independent formal capabilities, i.e., auto-formalization, sketching, and proving. To facilitate these capabilities, we propose a Hybrid-Experts Iteration Framework to expand high-quality task trajectories, including generating a formal statement based on a given informal problem, producing a whole-proof directly from the statement, or a lemma-style sketch. During agentic RL, we present a Hierarchical Importance Sampling Policy Optimization (HisPO) algorithm, which aims to stabilize the MoE model training on such long-horizon tasks. It employs a gradient masking strategy that accounts for the policy staleness and the inherent train-inference engine discrepancies at both sequence and token levels. Additionally, we also incorporate theorem consistency and legality detection mechanisms to eliminate reward hacking issues. Extensive evaluations show that our LongCat-Flash-Prover sets a new state-of-the-art for open-weights models in both auto-formalization and theorem proving. Demonstrating remarkable sample efficiency, it achieves a 97.1% pass rate on MiniF2F-Test using only 72 inference budget per problem. On more challenging benchmarks, it solves 70.8% of ProverBench and 41.5% of PutnamBench with no more than 220 attempts per problem, significantly outperforming existing open-weights baselines.