A Model of Mizar Concepts - Unification

The aim of this paper is to develop a formal theory of Mizar linguistic concepts following the ideas from [6] and [7]. The theory presented is an abstraction from the existing implementation of the Mizar system and is devoted to the formalization of Mizar expressions. The concepts formalized here are: standarized constructor signature, arity-rich signatures, and the unification of Mizar expressions.The University of Finance and Management, Białystok-Ełk, PolandGrzegorz Bancerek. König's theorem. Formalized Mathematics, 1(3):589-593, 1990.Grzegorz Bancerek. Cartesian product of functions. Formalized Mathematics, 2(4):547-552, 1991.Grzegorz Bancerek. Joining of decorated trees. Formalized Mathematics, 4(1):77-82, 1993.Grzegorz Bancerek. Subtrees. Formalized Mathematics, 5(2):185-190, 1996.Grzegorz Bancerek. Institution of many sorted algebras. Part I: Signature reduct of an algebra. Formalized Mathematics, 6(2):279-287, 1997.Grzegorz Bancerek. On the structure of Mizar types. In Herman Geuvers and Fairouz Kamareddine, editors, Electronic Notes in Theoretical Computer Science, volume 85. Elsevier, 2003.Grzegorz Bancerek. Towards the construction of a model of Mizar concepts. Formalized Mathematics, 16(2):207-230, 2008, doi:10.2478/v10037-008-0027-x.Grzegorz Bancerek and Krzysztof Hryniewiecki. Segments of natural numbers and finite sequences. Formalized Mathematics, 1(1):107-114, 1990.Grzegorz Bancerek and Artur Korniłowicz. Yet another construction of free algebra. Formalized Mathematics, 9(4):779-785, 2001.Grzegorz Bancerek and Yatsuka Nakamura. Full adder circuit. Part I. Formalized Mathematics, 5(3):367-380, 1996.Czesław Byliński. Finite sequences and tuples of elements of a non-empty sets. Formalized Mathematics, 1(3):529-536, 1990.Czesław Byliński. Functions and their basic properties. Formalized Mathematics, 1(1):55-65, 1990.Czesław Byliński. Functions from a set to a set. Formalized Mathematics, 1(1):153-164, 1990.Czesław Byliński. Partial functions. Formalized Mathematics, 1(2):357-367, 1990.Agata Darmochwał. Finite sets. Formalized Mathematics, 1(1):165-167, 1990.Beata Perkowska. Free many sorted universal algebra. Formalized Mathematics, 5(1):67-74, 1996.Andrzej Trybulec. Binary operations applied to functions. Formalized Mathematics, 1(2):329-334, 1990.Andrzej Trybulec. Tuples, projections and Cartesian products. Formalized Mathematics, 1(1):97-105, 1990.Andrzej Trybulec. Many sorted algebras. Formalized Mathematics, 5(1):37-42, 1996.Zinaida Trybulec. Properties of subsets. Formalized Mathematics, 1(1):67-71, 1990.Edmund Woronowicz. Relations and their basic properties. Formalized Mathematics, 1(1):73-83, 1990.Edmund Woronowicz. Relations defined on sets. Formalized Mathematics, 1(1):181-186, 1990

Set Theory or Higher Order Logic to Represent Auction Concepts in Isabelle?

When faced with the question of how to represent properties in a formal proof system any user has to make design decisions. We have proved three of the theorems from Maskin's 2004 survey article on Auction Theory using the Isabelle/HOL system, and we have produced verified code for combinatorial Vickrey auctions. A fundamental question in this was how to represent some basic concepts: since set theory is available inside Isabelle/HOL, when introducing new definitions there is often the issue of balancing the amount of set-theoretical objects and of objects expressed using entities which are more typical of higher order logic such as functions or lists. Likewise, a user has often to answer the question whether to use a constructive or a non-constructive definition. Such decisions have consequences for the proof development and the usability of the formalization. For instance, sets are usually closer to the representation that economists would use and recognize, while the other objects are closer to the extraction of computational content. In this paper we give examples of the advantages and disadvantages for these approaches and their relationships. In addition, we present the corresponding Isabelle library of definitions and theorems, most prominently those dealing with relations and quotients.Comment: Preprint of a paper accepted for the forthcoming CICM 2014 conference (cicm-conference.org/2014): S.M. Watt et al. (Eds.): CICM 2014, LNAI 8543, Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014. 16 pages, 1 figur

Premise Selection for Mathematics by Corpus Analysis and Kernel Methods

Smart premise selection is essential when using automated reasoning as a tool for large-theory formal proof development. A good method for premise selection in complex mathematical libraries is the application of machine learning to large corpora of proofs. This work develops learning-based premise selection in two ways. First, a newly available minimal dependency analysis of existing high-level formal mathematical proofs is used to build a large knowledge base of proof dependencies, providing precise data for ATP-based re-verification and for training premise selection algorithms. Second, a new machine learning algorithm for premise selection based on kernel methods is proposed and implemented. To evaluate the impact of both techniques, a benchmark consisting of 2078 large-theory mathematical problems is constructed,extending the older MPTP Challenge benchmark. The combined effect of the techniques results in a 50% improvement on the benchmark over the Vampire/SInE state-of-the-art system for automated reasoning in large theories.Comment: 26 page

Hammering towards QED

This paper surveys the emerging methods to automate reasoning over large libraries developed with formal proof assistants. We call these methods hammers. They give the authors of formal proofs a strong “one-stroke” tool for discharging difficult lemmas without the need for careful and detailed manual programming of proof search. The main ingredients underlying this approach are efficient automatic theorem provers that can cope with hundreds of axioms, suitable translations of the proof assistant’s logic to the logic of the automatic provers, heuristic and learning methods that select relevant facts from large libraries, and methods that reconstruct the automatically found proofs inside the proof assistants. We outline the history of these methods, explain the main issues and techniques, and show their strength on several large benchmarks. We also discuss the relation of this technology to the QED Manifesto and consider its implications for QED-like efforts.Blanchette’s Sledgehammer research was supported by the Deutsche Forschungs- gemeinschaft projects Quis Custodiet (grants NI 491/11-1 and NI 491/11-2) and Hardening the Hammer (grant NI 491/14-1). Kaliszyk is supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF) grant P26201. Sledgehammer was originally supported by the UK’s Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (grant GR/S57198/01). Urban’s work was supported by the Marie-Curie Outgoing International Fellowship project AUTOKNOMATH (grant MOIF-CT-2005-21875) and by the Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research (NWO) project Knowledge-based Automated Reasoning (grant 612.001.208).This is the final published version. It first appeared at http://jfr.unibo.it/article/view/4593/5730?acceptCookies=1

Learning-Assisted Automated Reasoning with Flyspeck

The considerable mathematical knowledge encoded by the Flyspeck project is combined with external automated theorem provers (ATPs) and machine-learning premise selection methods trained on the proofs, producing an AI system capable of answering a wide range of mathematical queries automatically. The performance of this architecture is evaluated in a bootstrapping scenario emulating the development of Flyspeck from axioms to the last theorem, each time using only the previous theorems and proofs. It is shown that 39% of the 14185 theorems could be proved in a push-button mode (without any high-level advice and user interaction) in 30 seconds of real time on a fourteen-CPU workstation. The necessary work involves: (i) an implementation of sound translations of the HOL Light logic to ATP formalisms: untyped first-order, polymorphic typed first-order, and typed higher-order, (ii) export of the dependency information from HOL Light and ATP proofs for the machine learners, and (iii) choice of suitable representations and methods for learning from previous proofs, and their integration as advisors with HOL Light. This work is described and discussed here, and an initial analysis of the body of proofs that were found fully automatically is provided

The use of data-mining for the automatic formation of tactics

This paper discusses the usse of data-mining for the automatic formation of tactics. It was presented at the Workshop on Computer-Supported Mathematical Theory Development held at IJCAR in 2004. The aim of this project is to evaluate the applicability of data-mining techniques to the automatic formation of tactics from large corpuses of proofs. We data-mine information from large proof corpuses to find commonly occurring patterns. These patterns are then evolved into tactics using genetic programming techniques

Higher-Order Tarski Grothendieck as a Foundation for Formal Proof

We formally introduce a foundation for computer verified proofs based on higher-order Tarski-Grothendieck set theory. We show that this theory has a model if a 2-inaccessible cardinal exists. This assumption is the same as the one needed for a model of plain Tarski-Grothendieck set theory. The foundation allows the co-existence of proofs based on two major competing foundations for formal proofs: higher-order logic and TG set theory. We align two co-existing Isabelle libraries, Isabelle/HOL and Isabelle/Mizar, in a single foundation in the Isabelle logical framework. We do this by defining isomorphisms between the basic concepts, including integers, functions, lists, and algebraic structures that preserve the important operations. With this we can transfer theorems proved in higher-order logic to TG set theory and vice versa. We practically show this by formally transferring Lagrange\u27s four-square theorem, Fermat 3-4, and other theorems between the foundations in the Isabelle framework

A Logic-Independent IDE

The author's MMT system provides a framework for defining and implementing logical systems. By combining MMT with the jEdit text editor, we obtain a logic-independent IDE. The IDE functionality includes advanced features such as context-sensitive auto-completion, search, and change management.Comment: In Proceedings UITP 2014, arXiv:1410.785