Isabelle/PIDE as Platform for Educational Tools

The Isabelle/PIDE platform addresses the question whether proof assistants of the LCF family are suitable as technological basis for educational tools. The traditionally strong logical foundations of systems like HOL, Coq, or Isabelle have so far been counter-balanced by somewhat inaccessible interaction via the TTY (or minor variations like the well-known Proof General / Emacs interface). Thus the fundamental question of math education tools with fully-formal background theories has often been answered negatively due to accidental weaknesses of existing proof engines. The idea of "PIDE" (which means "Prover IDE") is to integrate existing provers like Isabelle into a larger environment, that facilitates access by end-users and other tools. We use Scala to expose the proof engine in ML to the JVM world, where many user-interfaces, editor frameworks, and educational tools already exist. This shall ultimately lead to combined mathematical assistants, where the logical engine is in the background, without obstructing the view on applications of formal methods, formalized mathematics, and math education in particular.Comment: In Proceedings THedu'11, arXiv:1202.453

Formal representation and proof for cooperative games

In this contribution we present some work we have been doing in representing and proving theorems from the area of economics, and mainly we present work we will do in a project in which we will apply mechanised theorem proving tools to a class of economic problems for which very few general tools currently exist. For mechanised theorem proving, the research introduces the field to a new application domain with a large user base; more specifically, the researchers are collaborating with developers working on state-of-the-art theorem provers. For economics, the research will provide tools for handling a hard class of problems; more generally, as the first application of mechanised theorem proving to centrally involve economic theorists, it aims to properly introduce mechanised theorem proving techniques to the discipline.\u

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

A Vernacular for Coherent Logic

We propose a simple, yet expressive proof representation from which proofs for different proof assistants can easily be generated. The representation uses only a few inference rules and is based on a frag- ment of first-order logic called coherent logic. Coherent logic has been recognized by a number of researchers as a suitable logic for many ev- eryday mathematical developments. The proposed proof representation is accompanied by a corresponding XML format and by a suite of XSL transformations for generating formal proofs for Isabelle/Isar and Coq, as well as proofs expressed in a natural language form (formatted in LATEX or in HTML). Also, our automated theorem prover for coherent logic exports proofs in the proposed XML format. All tools are publicly available, along with a set of sample theorems.Comment: CICM 2014 - Conferences on Intelligent Computer Mathematics (2014

Matching concepts across HOL libraries

Many proof assistant libraries contain formalizations of the same mathematical concepts. The concepts are often introduced (defined) in different ways, but the properties that they have, and are in turn formalized, are the same. For the basic concepts, like natural numbers, matching them between libraries is often straightforward, because of mathematical naming conventions. However, for more advanced concepts, finding similar formalizations in different libraries is a non-trivial task even for an expert. In this paper we investigate automatic discovery of similar concepts across libraries of proof assistants. We propose an approach for normalizing properties of concepts in formal libraries and a number of similarity measures. We evaluate the approach on HOL based proof assistants HOL4, HOL Light and Isabelle/HOL, discovering 398 pairs of isomorphic constants and types

TLA+ Proofs

TLA+ is a specification language based on standard set theory and temporal logic that has constructs for hierarchical proofs. We describe how to write TLA+ proofs and check them with TLAPS, the TLA+ Proof System. We use Peterson's mutual exclusion algorithm as a simple example to describe the features of TLAPS and show how it and the Toolbox (an IDE for TLA+) help users to manage large, complex proofs.Comment: A shorter version of this article appeared in the proceedings of the conference Formal Methods 2012 (FM 2012, Paris, France, Springer LNCS 7436, pp. 147-154

Superposition as a logical glue

The typical mathematical language systematically exploits notational and logical abuses whose resolution requires not just the knowledge of domain specific notation and conventions, but not trivial skills in the given mathematical discipline. A large part of this background knowledge is expressed in form of equalities and isomorphisms, allowing mathematicians to freely move between different incarnations of the same entity without even mentioning the transformation. Providing ITP-systems with similar capabilities seems to be a major way to improve their intelligence, and to ease the communication between the user and the machine. The present paper discusses our experience of integration of a superposition calculus within the Matita interactive prover, providing in particular a very flexible, "smart" application tactic, and a simple, innovative approach to automation.Comment: In Proceedings TYPES 2009, arXiv:1103.311