Formalising Ordinal Partition Relations Using Isabelle/HOL

This is an overview of a formalisation project in the proof assistant Isabelle/HOL of a number of research results in infinitary combinatorics and set theory (more specifically in ordinal partition relations) by Erd\H{o}s--Milner, Specker, Larson and Nash-Williams, leading to Larson's proof of the unpublished result by E.C. Milner asserting that for all $m \in \mathbb{N}$, \omega^\omega\arrows(\omega^\omega, m). This material has been recently formalised by Paulson and is available on the Archive of Formal Proofs; here we discuss some of the most challenging aspects of the formalisation process. This project is also a demonstration of working with Zermelo-Fraenkel set theory in higher-order logic

UTP2: Higher-Order Equational Reasoning by Pointing

We describe a prototype theorem prover, UTP2, developed to match the style of hand-written proof work in the Unifying Theories of Programming semantical framework. This is based on alphabetised predicates in a 2nd-order logic, with a strong emphasis on equational reasoning. We present here an overview of the user-interface of this prover, which was developed from the outset using a point-and-click approach. We contrast this with the command-line paradigm that continues to dominate the mainstream theorem provers, and raises the question: can we have the best of both worlds?Comment: In Proceedings UITP 2014, arXiv:1410.785

Goal Translation for a Hammer for Coq (Extended Abstract)

Hammers are tools that provide general purpose automation for formal proof assistants. Despite the gaining popularity of the more advanced versions of type theory, there are no hammers for such systems. We present an extension of the various hammer components to type theory: (i) a translation of a significant part of the Coq logic into the format of automated proof systems; (ii) a proof reconstruction mechanism based on a Ben-Yelles-type algorithm combined with limited rewriting, congruence closure and a first-order generalization of the left rules of Dyckhoff's system LJT.Comment: In Proceedings HaTT 2016, arXiv:1606.0542

Robust Computer Algebra, Theorem Proving, and Oracle AI

In the context of superintelligent AI systems, the term "oracle" has two meanings. One refers to modular systems queried for domain-specific tasks. Another usage, referring to a class of systems which may be useful for addressing the value alignment and AI control problems, is a superintelligent AI system that only answers questions. The aim of this manuscript is to survey contemporary research problems related to oracles which align with long-term research goals of AI safety. We examine existing question answering systems and argue that their high degree of architectural heterogeneity makes them poor candidates for rigorous analysis as oracles. On the other hand, we identify computer algebra systems (CASs) as being primitive examples of domain-specific oracles for mathematics and argue that efforts to integrate computer algebra systems with theorem provers, systems which have largely been developed independent of one another, provide a concrete set of problems related to the notion of provable safety that has emerged in the AI safety community. We review approaches to interfacing CASs with theorem provers, describe well-defined architectural deficiencies that have been identified with CASs, and suggest possible lines of research and practical software projects for scientists interested in AI safety.Comment: 15 pages, 3 figure