Results 1 
3 of
3
Toward an objectoriented structure for mathematical text
 MATHEMATICAL KNOWLEDGE MANAGEMENT, 4TH INT’L CONF., PROCEEDINGS. VOLUME 3863 OF LECTURE NOTES IN ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
, 2006
"... Computerizing mathematical texts to allow software access to some or all of the texts ’ semantic content is a long and tedious process that currently requires much expertise. We believe it is useful to support computerization that adds some structural and semantic information, but does not require j ..."
Abstract

Cited by 17 (11 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Computerizing mathematical texts to allow software access to some or all of the texts ’ semantic content is a long and tedious process that currently requires much expertise. We believe it is useful to support computerization that adds some structural and semantic information, but does not require jumping directly from the wordprocessing level (e.g., L ATEX) to full formalization (e.g., Mizar, Coq, etc.). Although some existing mathematical languages are aimed at this middle ground (e.g., MathML, OpenMath, OMDoc), we believe they miss features needed to capture some important aspects of mathematical texts, especially the portion written with natural language. For this reason, we have been developing MathLang, a language for representing mathematical texts that has weak type checking and support for the special mathematical use of natural language. MathLang is currently aimed at only capturing the essential grammatical and binding structure of mathematical text without requiring full formalization. The development of MathLang is directly driven by experience encoding real mathematical texts. Based on this experience, this paper presents the changes that yield our latest version of MathLang. We have restructured and simplified the core of the language, replaced our old notion of “context” by a new system of blocks and local scoping, and made other changes. Furthermore, we have enhanced our support for the mathematical use of nouns and adjectives with objectoriented features so that nouns now correspond to classes, and adjectives to mixins.
Gradual computerisation/formalisation of mathematical texts into Mizar
 From Insight to Proof: Festschrift in Honour of Andrzej Trybulec
"... Abstract. We explain in this paper the gradual computerisation process of an ordinary mathematical text into more formal versions ending with a fully formalised Mizar text. The process is part of the MathLang–Mizar project and is divided into a number of steps (called aspects). The first three aspec ..."
Abstract

Cited by 9 (4 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. We explain in this paper the gradual computerisation process of an ordinary mathematical text into more formal versions ending with a fully formalised Mizar text. The process is part of the MathLang–Mizar project and is divided into a number of steps (called aspects). The first three aspects (CGa, TSa and DRa) are the same for any MathLang–TP project where TP is any proof checker (e.g., Mizar, Coq, Isabelle, etc). These first three aspects are theoretically formalised and implemented and provide the mathematician and/or TP user with useful tools/automation. Using TSa, the mathematician edits his mathematical text just as he would use L ATEX, but at the same time he sees the mathematical text as it appears on his paper. TSa also gives the mathematician easy editing facilities to help assign to parts of the text, grammatical and mathematical roles and to relate different parts through a number of mathematical, rethorical and structural relations. MathLang would then automatically produce CGa and DRa versions of the text, checks
On Correctness of Mathematical Texts from a Logical and Practical Point of View
 In Proceedings of the 9th AISC international conference, the 15th Calculemas symposium, and the 7th international MKM conference on Intelligent Computer Mathematics
, 2008
"... Abstract. Formalizing mathematical argument is a fascinating activity in itself and (we hope!) also bears important practical applications. While traditional proof theory investigates deducibility of an individual statement from a collection of premises, a mathematical proof, with its structure and ..."
Abstract

Cited by 3 (0 self)
 Add to MetaCart
Abstract. Formalizing mathematical argument is a fascinating activity in itself and (we hope!) also bears important practical applications. While traditional proof theory investigates deducibility of an individual statement from a collection of premises, a mathematical proof, with its structure and continuity, can hardly be presented as a single sequent or a set of logical formulas. What is called “mathematical text”, as used in mathematical practice through the ages, seems to be more appropriate. However, no commonly adopted formal notion of mathematical text has emerged so far. In this paper, we propose a formalism which aims to reflect natural (human) style and structure of mathematical argument, yet to be appropriate for automated processing: principally, verification of its correctness (we consciously use the word rather than “soundness ” or “validity”). We consider mathematical texts that are formalized in the ForTheL language (brief description of which is also given) and we formulate a point of view on what a correct mathematical text might be. Logical notion of correctness is formalized with the help of a calculus. Practically, these ideas, methods and algorithms are implemented in a proof assistant called SAD. We give a short description of SAD and a series of examples showing what can be done with it. 1