Formal Verification of Medina's Sequence of Polynomials for Approximating Arctangent

The verification of many algorithms for calculating transcendental functions is based on polynomial approximations to these functions, often Taylor series approximations. However, computing and verifying approximations to the arctangent function are very challenging problems, in large part because the Taylor series converges very slowly to arctangent-a 57th-degree polynomial is needed to get three decimal places for arctan(0.95). Medina proposed a series of polynomials that approximate arctangent with far faster convergence-a 7th-degree polynomial is all that is needed to get three decimal places for arctan(0.95). We present in this paper a proof in ACL2(r) of the correctness and convergence rate of this sequence of polynomials. The proof is particularly beautiful, in that it uses many results from real analysis. Some of these necessary results were proven in prior work, but some were proven as part of this effort.Comment: In Proceedings ACL2 2014, arXiv:1406.123

Equivalence of the Traditional and Non-Standard Definitions of Concepts from Real Analysis

ACL2(r) is a variant of ACL2 that supports the irrational real and complex numbers. Its logical foundation is based on internal set theory (IST), an axiomatic formalization of non-standard analysis (NSA). Familiar ideas from analysis, such as continuity, differentiability, and integrability, are defined quite differently in NSA-some would argue the NSA definitions are more intuitive. In previous work, we have adopted the NSA definitions in ACL2(r), and simply taken as granted that these are equivalent to the traditional analysis notions, e.g., to the familiar epsilon-delta definitions. However, we argue in this paper that there are circumstances when the more traditional definitions are advantageous in the setting of ACL2(r), precisely because the traditional notions are classical, so they are unencumbered by IST limitations on inference rules such as induction or the use of pseudo-lambda terms in functional instantiation. To address this concern, we describe a formal proof in ACL2(r) of the equivalence of the traditional and non-standards definitions of these notions.Comment: In Proceedings ACL2 2014, arXiv:1406.123

Fourier Series Formalization in ACL2(r)

We formalize some basic properties of Fourier series in the logic of ACL2(r), which is a variant of ACL2 that supports reasoning about the real and complex numbers by way of non-standard analysis. More specifically, we extend a framework for formally evaluating definite integrals of real-valued, continuous functions using the Second Fundamental Theorem of Calculus. Our extended framework is also applied to functions containing free arguments. Using this framework, we are able to prove the orthogonality relationships between trigonometric functions, which are the essential properties in Fourier series analysis. The sum rule for definite integrals of indexed sums is also formalized by applying the extended framework along with the First Fundamental Theorem of Calculus and the sum rule for differentiation. The Fourier coefficient formulas of periodic functions are then formalized from the orthogonality relations and the sum rule for integration. Consequently, the uniqueness of Fourier sums is a straightforward corollary. We also present our formalization of the sum rule for definite integrals of infinite series in ACL2(r). Part of this task is to prove the Dini Uniform Convergence Theorem and the continuity of a limit function under certain conditions. A key technique in our proofs of these theorems is to apply the overspill principle from non-standard analysis.Comment: In Proceedings ACL2 2015, arXiv:1509.0552

Implementing an Automatic Differentiator in ACL2

The foundational theory of differentiation was developed as part of the original release of ACL2(r). In work reported at the last ACL2 Workshop, we presented theorems justifying the usual differentiation rules, including the chain rule and the derivative of inverse functions. However, the process of applying these theorems to formalize the derivative of a particular function is completely manual. More recently, we developed a macro and supporting functions that can automate this process. This macro uses the ACL2 table facility to keep track of functions and their derivatives, and it also interacts with the macro that introduces inverse functions in ACL2(r), so that their derivatives can also be automated. In this paper, we present the implementation of this macro and related functions.Comment: In Proceedings ACL2 2011, arXiv:1110.447

Foundational Certification of Code Transformations Using Automatic Differentiation

Automatic Differentiation (AD) is concerned with the semantics augmentation of an input program representing a function to form a transformed program that computes the function's derivatives. To ensure the correctness  of the AD transformed code, particularly for safety critical applications, we aim at certifying the algebraic manipulations at the heart of the AD process. We have considered a WHILE-language and have shown how such proofs can be constructed by using an appropriate relational Hoare logic.In particular, we have shown how such inference rules can be constructed for both the forward and reverse mode AD by using an abductive logical reasoning

Formalization of Real Analysis: A Survey of Proof Assistants and Libraries

International audienceIn the recent years, numerous proof systems have improved enough to be used for formally verifying non-trivial mathematical results. They, however, have different purposes and it is not always easy to choose which one is adapted to undertake a formalization effort. In this survey, we focus on properties related to real analysis: real numbers, arithmetic operators, limits, differentiability, integrability, and so on. We have chosen to look into the formalizations provided in standard by the following systems: Coq, HOL4, HOL Light, Isabelle/HOL, Mizar, ProofPower-HOL, and PVS. We have also accounted for large developments that play a similar role or extend standard libraries: ACL2(r) for ACL2, C-CoRN/MathClasses for Coq, and the NASA PVS library. This survey presents how real numbers have been defined in these various provers and how the notions of real analysis described above have been formalized. We also look at the methods of automation these systems provide for real analysis