Our field is called automated theorem proving because traditionally it has been concerned with the art of finding proofs automatically. In the beginning, researchers were motivated by the wish to build computer systems that can automatically solve hard, mathematical problems. When searching for a hard proof, it is acceptable for a system to eat up all resources and not to recognise false theorems. However in the last years, one has become aware of the fact that for applications, one also needs to be able to efficiently identify non-theorems. For example, automated theorem proving systems are now being used as assistants which must automatically solve easy subtasks in large, interactive projects. For such problems, the expectations to the automated theorem prover are different: The input problems are not terribly hard, usually contain additional irrelevant information, and often they are not provable. In case the subgoal is incorrect, it is not acceptable to simply remain silent and consume all resources in an interactive system. Apart from the applications, the field of disproving has triggered many interesting theoretical research questions, which are interesting on their own. For example, one of the contributed papers addresses the problem of how to repair (modify) a non-theorem in such a way that it becomes a theorem. We also have two contributions about finding counter-models in non-standard logics. One of the contributions addresses this problem for resource logics, the other for Gödel-Dummett logic. The workshop consists of seven contributed talks and one invited talk by Alan Bundy with title Finding and Using Counter Examples. In addition, we share an invite
To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.