Results 1 
5 of
5
A Comparison of the Mathematical Proof Languages Mizar and Isar
 Journal of Automated Reasoning
, 2002
"... The mathematical proof checker Mizar by Andrzej Trybulec uses a proof input language that is much more readable than the input languages of most other proof assistants. This system also di#ers in many other respects from most current systems. John Harrison has shown that one can have a Mizar mode on ..."
Abstract

Cited by 9 (3 self)
 Add to MetaCart
The mathematical proof checker Mizar by Andrzej Trybulec uses a proof input language that is much more readable than the input languages of most other proof assistants. This system also di#ers in many other respects from most current systems. John Harrison has shown that one can have a Mizar mode on top of a tactical prover, allowing one to combine a mathematical proof language with other styles of proof checking. Currently the only fully developed Mizar mode in this style is the Isar proof language for the Isabelle theorem prover. In fact the Isar language has become the o#cial input language to the Isabelle system, even though many users still use its lowlevel tactical part only.
A Comparison of Mizar and Isar
 J. Automated Reasoning
, 2002
"... Abstract. The mathematical proof checker Mizar by Andrzej Trybulec uses a proof input language that is much more readable than the input languages of most other proof assistants. This system also differs in many other respects from most current systems. John Harrison has shown that one can have a Mi ..."
Abstract

Cited by 8 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. The mathematical proof checker Mizar by Andrzej Trybulec uses a proof input language that is much more readable than the input languages of most other proof assistants. This system also differs in many other respects from most current systems. John Harrison has shown that one can have a Mizar mode on top of a tactical prover, allowing one to combine a mathematical proof language with other styles of proof checking. Currently the only fully developed Mizar mode in this style is the Isar proof language for the Isabelle theorem prover. In fact the Isar language has become the official input language to the Isabelle system, even though many users still use its lowlevel tactical part only. In this paper we compare Mizar and Isar. A small example, Euclid’s proof of the existence of infinitely many primes, is shown in both systems. We also include slightly higherlevel views of formal proof sketches. Moreover a list of differences between Mizar and Isar is presented, highlighting the strengths of both systems from the perspective of endusers. Finally, we point out some key differences of the
A Compendium of Continuous Lattices in MIZAR  Formalizing recent mathematics
, 2002
"... This paper reports on the Mizar formalization of the theory of continuous lattices as presented in A Compendium of Continuous Lattices, [25]. By the Mizar formalization we mean a formulation of theorems, de nitions, and proofs written in the Mizar language whose correctness is veri ed by the Mizar ..."
Abstract

Cited by 5 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
This paper reports on the Mizar formalization of the theory of continuous lattices as presented in A Compendium of Continuous Lattices, [25]. By the Mizar formalization we mean a formulation of theorems, de nitions, and proofs written in the Mizar language whose correctness is veri ed by the Mizar processor. This eort was originally motivated by the question of whether or not the Mizar system was suciently developed for the task of expressing advanced mathematics. The current state of the formalization57 Mizar articles written by 16 authors indicates that in principle the Mizar system has successfully met the challenge. To our knowledge it is the most sizable eort aimed at mechanically checking some substantial and relatively recent eld of advanced mathematics. However, it does not mean that doing mathematics in Mizar is as simple as doing mathematics traditionally (if doing mathematics is simple at all). The work of formalizing the material of [25] has: (i) prompted many improvements of the Mizar proof checking system; (ii) caused numerous revisions of the the Mizar data base; and (iii) contributed to the \to do" list of further changes to the Mizar system.
ccl – A Compendium of Continuous Lattices [25]
, 2002
"... Abstract. This paper reports on the Mizar formalization of the theory of continuous lattices as presented in A Compendium of Continuous Lattices, [25]. By the Mizar formalization we mean a formulation of theorems, definitions, and proofs written in the Mizar language whose correctness is verified by ..."
Abstract
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. This paper reports on the Mizar formalization of the theory of continuous lattices as presented in A Compendium of Continuous Lattices, [25]. By the Mizar formalization we mean a formulation of theorems, definitions, and proofs written in the Mizar language whose correctness is verified by the Mizar processor. This effort was originally motivated by the question of whether or not the Mizar system was sufficiently developed for the task of expressing advanced mathematics. The current state of the formalization—57 Mizar articles written by 16 authors— indicates that in principle the Mizar system has successfully met the challenge. To our knowledge it is the most sizable effort aimed at mechanically checking some substantial and relatively recent field of advanced mathematics. However, it does not mean that doing mathematics in Mizar is as simple as doing mathematics traditionally (if doing mathematics is simple at all). The work of formalizing the material of [25] has: (i) prompted many improvements of the Mizar proof checking system; (ii) caused numerous revisions of the the Mizar data base; and (iii) contributed to the “to do ” list of further changes to the Mizar system.