On choice rules in dependent type theory

In a dependent type theory satisfying the propositions as types correspondence together with the proofs-as-programs paradigm, the validity of the unique choice rule or even more of the choice rule says that the extraction of a computable witness from an existential statement under hypothesis can be performed within the same theory. Here we show that the unique choice rule, and hence the choice rule, are not valid both in Coquand\u2019s Calculus of Constructions with indexed sum types, list types and binary disjoint sums and in its predicative version implemented in the intensional level of the Minimalist Founda- tion. This means that in these theories the extraction of computational witnesses from existential statements must be performed in a more ex- pressive proofs-as-programs theory

Elaboration in Dependent Type Theory

To be usable in practice, interactive theorem provers need to provide convenient and efficient means of writing expressions, definitions, and proofs. This involves inferring information that is often left implicit in an ordinary mathematical text, and resolving ambiguities in mathematical expressions. We refer to the process of passing from a quasi-formal and partially-specified expression to a completely precise formal one as elaboration. We describe an elaboration algorithm for dependent type theory that has been implemented in the Lean theorem prover. Lean's elaborator supports higher-order unification, type class inference, ad hoc overloading, insertion of coercions, the use of tactics, and the computational reduction of terms. The interactions between these components are subtle and complex, and the elaboration algorithm has been carefully designed to balance efficiency and usability. We describe the central design goals, and the means by which they are achieved

Nine Chapters of Analytic Number Theory in Isabelle/HOL

In this paper, I present a formalisation of a large portion of Apostol\u27s Introduction to Analytic Number Theory in Isabelle/HOL. Of the 14 chapters in the book, the content of 9 has been mostly formalised, while the content of 3 others was already mostly available in Isabelle before. The most interesting results that were formalised are: - The Riemann and Hurwitz zeta functions and the Dirichlet L functions - Dirichlet\u27s theorem on primes in arithmetic progressions - An analytic proof of the Prime Number Theorem - The asymptotics of arithmetical functions such as the prime omega function, the divisor count sigma_0(n), and Euler\u27s totient function phi(n

Assertion level proof planning with compiled strategies

This book presents new techniques that allow the automatic verification and generation of abstract human-style proofs. The core of this approach builds an efficient calculus that works directly by applying definitions, theorems, and axioms, which reduces the size of the underlying proof object by a factor of ten. The calculus is extended by the deep inference paradigm which allows the application of inference rules at arbitrary depth inside logical expressions and provides new proofs that are exponentially shorter and not available in the sequent calculus without cut. In addition, a strategy language for abstract underspecified declarative proof patterns is developed. Together, the complementary methods provide a framework to automate declarative proofs. The benefits of the techniques are illustrated by practical applications.Die vorliegende Arbeit beschäftigt sich damit, das Formalisieren von Beweisen zu vereinfachen, indem Methoden entwickelt werden, um informale Beweise formal zu verifizieren und erzeugen zu können. Dazu wird ein abstrakter Kalkül entwickelt, der direkt auf der Faktenebene arbeitet, welche von Menschen geführten Beweisen relativ nahe kommt. Anhand einer Fallstudie wird gezeigt, dass die abstrakte Beweisführung auf der Fakteneben vorteilhaft für automatische Suchverfahren ist. Zusätzlich wird eine Strategiesprache entwickelt, die es erlaubt, unterspezifizierte Beweismuster innerhalb des Beweisdokumentes zu spezifizieren und Beweisskizzen automatisch zu verfeinern. Fallstudien zeigen, dass komplexe Beweismuster kompakt in der entwickelten Strategiesprache spezifiziert werden können. Zusammen bilden die einander ergänzenden Methoden den Rahmen zur Automatisierung von deklarativen Beweisen auf der Faktenebene, die bisher überwiegend manuell entwickelt werden mussten

Assertion level proof planning with compiled strategies

This book presents new techniques that allow the automatic verification and generation of abstract human-style proofs. The core of this approach builds an efficient calculus that works directly by applying definitions, theorems, and axioms, which reduces the size of the underlying proof object by a factor of ten. The calculus is extended by the deep inference paradigm which allows the application of inference rules at arbitrary depth inside logical expressions and provides new proofs that are exponentially shorter and not available in the sequent calculus without cut. In addition, a strategy language for abstract underspecified declarative proof patterns is developed. Together, the complementary methods provide a framework to automate declarative proofs. The benefits of the techniques are illustrated by practical applications.Die vorliegende Arbeit beschäftigt sich damit, das Formalisieren von Beweisen zu vereinfachen, indem Methoden entwickelt werden, um informale Beweise formal zu verifizieren und erzeugen zu können. Dazu wird ein abstrakter Kalkül entwickelt, der direkt auf der Faktenebene arbeitet, welche von Menschen geführten Beweisen relativ nahe kommt. Anhand einer Fallstudie wird gezeigt, dass die abstrakte Beweisführung auf der Fakteneben vorteilhaft für automatische Suchverfahren ist. Zusätzlich wird eine Strategiesprache entwickelt, die es erlaubt, unterspezifizierte Beweismuster innerhalb des Beweisdokumentes zu spezifizieren und Beweisskizzen automatisch zu verfeinern. Fallstudien zeigen, dass komplexe Beweismuster kompakt in der entwickelten Strategiesprache spezifiziert werden können. Zusammen bilden die einander ergänzenden Methoden den Rahmen zur Automatisierung von deklarativen Beweisen auf der Faktenebene, die bisher überwiegend manuell entwickelt werden mussten

Automated Reasoning

This volume, LNAI 13385, constitutes the refereed proceedings of the 11th International Joint Conference on Automated Reasoning, IJCAR 2022, held in Haifa, Israel, in August 2022. The 32 full research papers and 9 short papers presented together with two invited talks were carefully reviewed and selected from 85 submissions. The papers focus on the following topics: Satisfiability, SMT Solving,Arithmetic; Calculi and Orderings; Knowledge Representation and Jutsification; Choices, Invariance, Substitutions and Formalization; Modal Logics; Proofs System and Proofs Search; Evolution, Termination and Decision Prolems. This is an open access book

A predicative variant of a realizability tripos for the Minimalist Foundation.

open2noHere we present a predicative variant of a realizability tripos validating the intensional level of the Minimalist Foundation extended with Formal Church thesis.the file attached contains the whole number of the journal including the mentioned pubblicationopenMaietti, Maria Emilia; Maschio, SamueleMaietti, MARIA EMILIA; Maschio, Samuel

Formalization of Formal Topology by means of the interactive theorem prover Matita

The project entitled “Formalization of Formal Topology by means of the interactive theorem prover Matita ” is an official bilateral project between the Universities of Padova and Bologna, funded by the former, active ¡¡¡¡¡¡ ¡.mine from march 2008 until august 2010. The project brought together and exploited the synergic collaboration of two communities of researchers, both centered around constructive type theory: ====== = from March 2008 until August 2010. The project aimed to bring together and exploit the synergic collaboration of two communities of researchers, both centered around constructive type theory: ¿¿¿¿¿¿ ¿.r3432 on one side the Logic Group at the University of Padova, focused on developing formal, pointfree topology within a constructive and predicative framework; on the other side, the Helm group at the University of Bologna, developing the Matita Interactive Theorem Prover [2], a young proof assistant based on the Calculus of Inductive Constructions as its logical foundation. The idea of the project was to formalize and check the new approach to formal topology being developed in Padova by means of Matita, with the aim o