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

Abstract not found

We report on how mathematics is done in the Mizar system. Mizar oers a language for writing mathematics and provides software for proof-checking. Mizar is used to build Mizar Mathematical Library (MML). This is a long term project aiming at building a comprehensive library of mathematical knowledge. The language and the checking software evolve and the evolution is driven by the growing MML.

Abstract. There are many styles for the narrative structure of a mathematical document. Each mathematician has its own conventions and traditions about labeling portions of texts (e.g., chapter, section, theorem or proof) and identifying statements according to their logical importance (e.g., theorem is more important than lemma). Such narrative/structuring labels guide the reader’s navigation of the text and form the key components in the reasoning structure of the theory reflected in the text. We present in this paper a method to computerise the narrative structure of a text which includes the relationships between labeled text entities. These labels and relations are input by the user on top of their natural language text. This narrative structure is then automatically analysed to check its consistency. This automatic analysis consists of two phases: (1) checking the correct usage of labels and relations (i.e., that a “proof” justifies a “theorem ” but cannot justify an “axiom”) and (2) checking that the logical precedences in the document are self-consistent. The development of this method was driven by the experience of computerising a number of mathematical documents (covering different authoring styles). We illustrate how such computerised narrative structure could be used for further manipulations, i.e. to build a skeleton of a formal document in a formal system like Mizar, Coq or Isabelle. 1

The year 2004 marked the fiftieth birthday of the first computer generated proof of a mathematical theorem: “the sum of two even numbers is again an even number ” (with Martin Davis ’ implementation of Presburger Arithmetic in 1954). While Martin Davis and later the research community of automated deduction used machine oriented calculi to find the proof for a theorem by automatic means, the Automath project of N.G. de Bruijn – more modest in its aims with respect to automation – showed in the late 1960s and early 70s that a complete mathematical textbook could be coded and proof-checked by a computer. Roughly at the same time in 1973, the Mizar project started as an attempt to reconstruct mathematics based on computers. Since 1989, the most important activity in the Mizar project has been the development of a database for mathematics. International cooperation resulted in creating a database which includes more than 7000 definitions of mathematical concepts and more than 42000 theorems. The work by

We report on the development of algebra in the Mizar system. This includes the construction of formal multivariate power series and polynomials as well as the de nition of ideals up to a proof of the Hilbert basis theorem. We present how the algebraic structures are handled and how we inherited the past developments from the Mizar Mathematical Library (MML). The MML evolves and past contributions are revised and generalized. Our work on formal power series caused a number of such revisions. It seems that revising past developments with an intent to generalize them is a necessity when building a data base of formalized mathematics. This poses a question: how much generalization is best?

Abstract not found

Abstract not found