Skip to content
Tech News
← Back to articles

The part of Navier-Stokes no one is talking about

read original get The Hitchhiker's Guide to Logical Verification (Lean 4) → more articles
Why This Matters

OpenAI's Navier-Stokes result grabbed headlines, but the overlooked detail is that it shipped with a machine-checkable Lean 4 proof produced in 17 hours instead of the person-years such formalization traditionally required. If AI can cut the cost of formal verification by orders of magnitude, it moves formal methods from an academic luxury to a routine tool. That matters well beyond math, extending to software, security policy, and any domain where correctness can be specified.

Key Takeaways
Worth a Look

The Hitchhiker's Guide to Logical Verification (Lean 4) — If the article's talk of Lean 4 formal proofs has you curious, this is the standard hands-on introduction to writing and checking proofs in Lean 4. It walks you from basic tactics to real formalization, so you can see for yourself what those machine-verified Navier-Stokes proofs actually look like.

See The Hitchhiker's Guide to Logical Verification (Lean 4) on Amazon → Affiliate link — we may earn a commission on purchases, at no extra cost to you. Product picked by AI based on this article; it is not a tested recommendation.

Yesterday OpenAI announced a proof that settled a long-standing question about the Navier-Stokes equations from fluid dynamics. The announcement has created a lot of buzz, as one would expect. But there’s an aspect of OpenAI’s work that I haven’t seen anyone talk about: they posted a Lean 4 formal proof at the same time as their conventional human-readable proof.

Quite a few other mathematical conjectures have been settled recently using AI, and these have also been accompanied with formal proofs, using Lean 4 in particular.

Until very recently, generating machine-verifiable formal proofs has been excruciatingly tedious. In 2005, Henk Barendregt and Freek Wiedijk wrote

To give an indication of how much work is needed for formalisation, we estimate that it takes approximately one work-week (five work-days of eight work-hours) to formalise one page from an undergraduate mathematics textbook.

That was the rule of thumb: forty hours per page. And this in the context of undergraduate textbooks. Research publications are much denser than textbooks. Furthermore, page 100 of a textbook probably depends mostly on material on pages 1 through 99. A sentence in a research article could cite anything that has been published before.

Say a research article takes 20 times more effort to formalize than page in an undergraduate textbook. Then formalizing the 166-page paper from OpenAI would take 132,800 person-hours. It took OpenAI 17 hours to verify their proof in Lean. I hesitate to use the word “revolutionary,” but lowering the cost of anything by four orders of magnitude is revolutionary.

I’ve used AI to generate formal proofs to check my work just for a little blog post. I wouldn’t dream of doing that if I had to pay someone a week’s salary to check my work.

Formal verification doesn’t just apply to mathematics. You could, for example, formally verify that a set of security policies are consistent and that, given certain assumptions, they accomplish their purpose. You could formally verify that a smart contract imposes a certain maximum liability. You could verify the correctness of mission-critical algorithms. These problems are easier than formalizing mathematics research, and it is easier to quantify the return on investment.

Related posts