-
Monoid Theory in Alonzo: A Little Theories Formalization in Simple Type Theory
Authors:
William M. Farmer,
Dennis Y. Zvigelsky
Abstract:
Alonzo is a practice-oriented classical higher-order logic that extends first-order logic and that admits undefined expressions. Named in honor of Alonzo Church, Alonzo is based on Church's type theory, Church's formulation of simple type theory. The little theories method is a method for formalizing mathematical knowledge as a network of theories called a theory graph consisting of theories as no…
▽ More
Alonzo is a practice-oriented classical higher-order logic that extends first-order logic and that admits undefined expressions. Named in honor of Alonzo Church, Alonzo is based on Church's type theory, Church's formulation of simple type theory. The little theories method is a method for formalizing mathematical knowledge as a network of theories called a theory graph consisting of theories as nodes and theory morphisms as directed edges. The development of a mathematical topic is done in the "little theory" in the theory graph that has the most convenient level of abstraction and the most convenient vocabulary, and then the definitions and theorems produced in the development are transported, as needed, to other theories via the theory morphisms in the theory graph. The purpose of this paper is to illustrate how a body of mathematical knowledge can be formalized in Alonzo using the little theories method. This is done by formalizing monoid theory -- the body of mathematical knowledge about monoids -- in Alonzo.
△ Less
Submitted 15 November, 2024; v1 submitted 9 December, 2023;
originally announced December 2023.
-
Leveraging the Information Contained in Theory Presentations
Authors:
Jacques Carette,
William M. Farmer,
Yasmine Sharoda
Abstract:
A theorem prover without an extensive library is much less useful to its potential users. Algebra, the study of algebraic structures, is a core component of such libraries. Algebraic theories also are themselves structured, the study of which was started as Universal Algebra. Various constructions (homomorphism, term algebras, products, etc) and their properties are both universal and constructive…
▽ More
A theorem prover without an extensive library is much less useful to its potential users. Algebra, the study of algebraic structures, is a core component of such libraries. Algebraic theories also are themselves structured, the study of which was started as Universal Algebra. Various constructions (homomorphism, term algebras, products, etc) and their properties are both universal and constructive. Thus they are ripe for being automated. Unfortunately, current practice still requires library builders to write these by hand.
We first highlight specific redundancies in libraries of existing systems. Then we describe a framework for generating these derived concepts from theory definitions. We demonstrate the usefulness of this framework on a test library of 227 theories.
△ Less
Submitted 5 June, 2020;
originally announced June 2020.
-
The Space of Mathematical Software Systems -- A Survey of Paradigmatic Systems
Authors:
Katja Bercic,
Jacques Carette,
William M. Farmer,
Michael Kohlhase,
Dennis Müller,
Florian Rabe,
Yasmine Sharoda
Abstract:
Mathematical software systems are becoming more and more important in pure and applied mathematics in order to deal with the complexity and scalability issues inherent in mathematics. In the last decades we have seen a cambric explosion of increasingly powerful but also diverging systems. To give researchers a guide to this space of systems, we devise a novel conceptualization of mathematical soft…
▽ More
Mathematical software systems are becoming more and more important in pure and applied mathematics in order to deal with the complexity and scalability issues inherent in mathematics. In the last decades we have seen a cambric explosion of increasingly powerful but also diverging systems. To give researchers a guide to this space of systems, we devise a novel conceptualization of mathematical software that focuses on five aspects: inference covers formal logic and reasoning about mathematical statements via proofs and models, typically with strong emphasis on correctness; computation covers algorithms and software libraries for representing and manipulating mathematical objects, typically with strong emphasis on efficiency; concretization covers generating and maintaining collections of mathematical objects conforming to a certain pattern, typically with strong emphasis on complete enumeration; narration covers describing mathematical contexts and relations, typically with strong emphasis on human readability; finally, organization covers representing mathematical contexts and objects in machine-actionable formal languages, typically with strong emphasis on expressivity and system interoperability. Despite broad agreement that an ideal system would seamlessly integrate all these aspects, research has diversified into families of highly specialized systems focusing on a single aspect and possibly partially integrating others, each with their own communities, challenges, and successes. In this survey, we focus on the commonalities and differences of these systems from the perspective of a future multi-aspect system.
△ Less
Submitted 12 February, 2020;
originally announced February 2020.
-
Big Math and the One-Brain Barrier A Position Paper and Architecture Proposal
Authors:
Jacques Carette,
William M. Farmer,
Michael Kohlhase,
Florian Rabe
Abstract:
Over the last decades, a class of important mathematical results have required an ever increasing amount of human effort to carry out. For some, the help of computers is now indispensable. We analyze the implications of this trend towards "big mathematics", its relation to human cognition, and how machine support for big math can be organized. The central contribution of this position paper is an…
▽ More
Over the last decades, a class of important mathematical results have required an ever increasing amount of human effort to carry out. For some, the help of computers is now indispensable. We analyze the implications of this trend towards "big mathematics", its relation to human cognition, and how machine support for big math can be organized. The central contribution of this position paper is an information model for "doing mathematics", which posits that humans very efficiently integrate four aspects: inference, computation, tabulation, and narration around a well-organized core of mathematical knowledge. The challenge for mathematical software systems is that these four aspects need to be integrated as well. We briefly survey the state of the art.
△ Less
Submitted 22 October, 2019; v1 submitted 23 April, 2019;
originally announced April 2019.
-
Towards Specifying Symbolic Computation
Authors:
Jacques Carette,
William M. Farmer
Abstract:
Many interesting and useful symbolic computation algorithms manipulate mathematical expressions in mathematically meaningful ways. Although these algorithms are commonplace in computer algebra systems, they can be surprisingly difficult to specify in a formal logic since they involve an interplay of syntax and semantics. In this paper we discuss several examples of syntax-based mathematical algori…
▽ More
Many interesting and useful symbolic computation algorithms manipulate mathematical expressions in mathematically meaningful ways. Although these algorithms are commonplace in computer algebra systems, they can be surprisingly difficult to specify in a formal logic since they involve an interplay of syntax and semantics. In this paper we discuss several examples of syntax-based mathematical algorithms, and we show how to specify them in a formal logic with undefinedness, quotation, and evaluation.
△ Less
Submitted 6 May, 2019; v1 submitted 4 April, 2019;
originally announced April 2019.
-
A New Style of Proof for Mathematics Organized as a Network of Axiomatic Theories
Authors:
William M. Farmer
Abstract:
A theory graph is a network of axiomatic theories connected with meaning-preserving mappings called theory morphisms. Theory graphs are well suited for organizing large bodies of mathematical knowledge. Traditional and formal proofs do not adequately fulfill all the purposes that mathematical proofs have, and they do not exploit the structure inherent in a theory graph. We propose a new style of p…
▽ More
A theory graph is a network of axiomatic theories connected with meaning-preserving mappings called theory morphisms. Theory graphs are well suited for organizing large bodies of mathematical knowledge. Traditional and formal proofs do not adequately fulfill all the purposes that mathematical proofs have, and they do not exploit the structure inherent in a theory graph. We propose a new style of proof that fulfills the principal purposes of a mathematical proof as well as capitalizes on the connections provided by the theory morphisms in a theory graph. This new style of proof combines the strengths of traditional proofs with the strengths of formal proofs.
△ Less
Submitted 1 December, 2018; v1 submitted 3 June, 2018;
originally announced June 2018.
-
Biform Theories: Project Description
Authors:
Jacques Carette,
William M. Farmer,
Yasmine Sharoda
Abstract:
A biform theory is a combination of an axiomatic theory and an algorithmic theory that supports the integration of reasoning and computation. These are ideal for specifying and reasoning about algorithms that manipulate mathematical expressions. However, formalizing biform theories is challenging since it requires the means to express statements about the interplay of what these algorithms do and…
▽ More
A biform theory is a combination of an axiomatic theory and an algorithmic theory that supports the integration of reasoning and computation. These are ideal for specifying and reasoning about algorithms that manipulate mathematical expressions. However, formalizing biform theories is challenging since it requires the means to express statements about the interplay of what these algorithms do and what their actions mean mathematically. This paper describes a project to develop a methodology for expressing, manipulating, managing, and generating mathematical knowledge as a network of biform theories. It is a subproject of MathScheme, a long-term project at McMaster University to produce a framework for integrating formal deduction and symbolic computation.
△ Less
Submitted 12 June, 2018; v1 submitted 29 April, 2018;
originally announced May 2018.
-
HOL Light QE
Authors:
Jacques Carette,
William M. Farmer,
Patrick Laskowski
Abstract:
We are interested in algorithms that manipulate mathematical expressions in mathematically meaningful ways. Expressions are syntactic, but most logics do not allow one to discuss syntax. ${\rm CTT}_{\rm qe}$ is a version of Church's type theory that includes quotation and evaluation operators, akin to quote and eval in the Lisp programming language. Since the HOL logic is also a version of Church'…
▽ More
We are interested in algorithms that manipulate mathematical expressions in mathematically meaningful ways. Expressions are syntactic, but most logics do not allow one to discuss syntax. ${\rm CTT}_{\rm qe}$ is a version of Church's type theory that includes quotation and evaluation operators, akin to quote and eval in the Lisp programming language. Since the HOL logic is also a version of Church's type theory, we decided to add quotation and evaluation to HOL Light to demonstrate the implementability of ${\rm CTT}_{\rm qe}$ and the benefits of having quotation and evaluation in a proof assistant. The resulting system is called HOL Light QE. Here we document the design of HOL Light QE and the challenges that needed to be overcome. The resulting implementation is freely available.
△ Less
Submitted 12 May, 2018; v1 submitted 1 February, 2018;
originally announced February 2018.
-
Formalizing Mathematical Knowledge as a Biform Theory Graph: A Case Study
Authors:
Jacques Carette,
William M. Farmer
Abstract:
A biform theory is a combination of an axiomatic theory and an algorithmic theory that supports the integration of reasoning and computation. These are ideal for formalizing algorithms that manipulate mathematical expressions. A theory graph is a network of theories connected by meaning-preserving theory morphisms that map the formulas of one theory to the formulas of another theory. Theory graphs…
▽ More
A biform theory is a combination of an axiomatic theory and an algorithmic theory that supports the integration of reasoning and computation. These are ideal for formalizing algorithms that manipulate mathematical expressions. A theory graph is a network of theories connected by meaning-preserving theory morphisms that map the formulas of one theory to the formulas of another theory. Theory graphs are in turn well suited for formalizing mathematical knowledge at the most convenient level of abstraction using the most convenient vocabulary. We are interested in the problem of whether a body of mathematical knowledge can be effectively formalized as a theory graph of biform theories. As a test case, we look at the graph of theories encoding natural number arithmetic. We used two different formalisms to do this, which we describe and compare. The first is realized in ${\rm CTT}_{\rm uqe}$, a version of Church's type theory with quotation and evaluation, and the second is realized in Agda, a dependently typed programming language.
△ Less
Submitted 26 July, 2017; v1 submitted 1 April, 2017;
originally announced April 2017.
-
Theory Morphisms in Church's Type Theory with Quotation and Evaluation
Authors:
William M. Farmer
Abstract:
${\rm CTT}_{\rm qe}$ is a version of Church's type theory with global quotation and evaluation operators that is engineered to reason about the interplay of syntax and semantics and to formalize syntax-based mathematical algorithms. ${\rm CTT}_{\rm uqe}$ is a variant of ${\rm CTT}_{\rm qe}…
▽ More
${\rm CTT}_{\rm qe}$ is a version of Church's type theory with global quotation and evaluation operators that is engineered to reason about the interplay of syntax and semantics and to formalize syntax-based mathematical algorithms. ${\rm CTT}_{\rm uqe}$ is a variant of ${\rm CTT}_{\rm qe}$ that admits undefined expressions, partial functions, and multiple base types of individuals. It is better suited than ${\rm CTT}_{\rm qe}$ as a logic for building networks of theories connected by theory morphisms. This paper presents the syntax and semantics of ${\rm CTT}_{\rm uqe}$, defines a notion of a theory morphism from one ${\rm CTT}_{\rm uqe}$ theory to another, and gives two simple examples that illustrate the use of theory morphisms in ${\rm CTT}_{\rm uqe}$.
△ Less
Submitted 26 July, 2017; v1 submitted 6 March, 2017;
originally announced March 2017.
-
Incorporating Quotation and Evaluation Into Church's Type Theory
Authors:
William M. Farmer
Abstract:
${\rm CTT}_{\rm qe}$ is a version of Church's type theory that includes quotation and evaluation operators that are similar to quote and eval in the Lisp programming language. With quotation and evaluation it is possible to reason in ${\rm CTT}_{\rm qe}…
▽ More
${\rm CTT}_{\rm qe}$ is a version of Church's type theory that includes quotation and evaluation operators that are similar to quote and eval in the Lisp programming language. With quotation and evaluation it is possible to reason in ${\rm CTT}_{\rm qe}$ about the interplay of the syntax and semantics of expressions and, as a result, to formalize syntax-based mathematical algorithms. We present the syntax and semantics of ${\rm CTT}_{\rm qe}$ as well as a proof system for ${\rm CTT}_{\rm qe}$. The proof system is shown to be sound for all formulas and complete for formulas that do not contain evaluations. We give several examples that illustrate the usefulness of having quotation and evaluation in ${\rm CTT}_{\rm qe}$.
△ Less
Submitted 19 March, 2018; v1 submitted 8 December, 2016;
originally announced December 2016.
-
Incorporating Quotation and Evaluation into Church's Type Theory: Syntax and Semantics
Authors:
William M. Farmer
Abstract:
${\rm \small CTT}_{\rm qe}$ is a version of Church's type theory that includes quotation and evaluation operators that are similar to quote and eval in the Lisp programming language. With quotation and evaluation it is possible to reason in ${\rm \small CTT}_{\rm qe}…
▽ More
${\rm \small CTT}_{\rm qe}$ is a version of Church's type theory that includes quotation and evaluation operators that are similar to quote and eval in the Lisp programming language. With quotation and evaluation it is possible to reason in ${\rm \small CTT}_{\rm qe}$ about the interplay of the syntax and semantics of expressions and, as a result, to formalize syntax-based mathematical algorithms. We present the syntax and semantics of ${\rm \small CTT}_{\rm qe}$ and give several examples that illustrate the usefulness of having quotation and evaluation in ${\rm \small CTT}_{\rm qe}$. We do not give a proof system for ${\rm \small CTT}_{\rm qe}$, but we do sketch what a proof system could look like.
△ Less
Submitted 24 August, 2016; v1 submitted 23 May, 2016;
originally announced May 2016.
-
Andrews' Type Theory with Undefinedness
Authors:
William M. Farmer
Abstract:
${\cal Q}_0$ is an elegant version of Church's type theory formulated and extensively studied by Peter B. Andrews. Like other traditional logics, ${\cal Q}_0$ does not admit undefined terms. The "traditional approach to undefinedness" in mathematical practice is to treat undefined terms as legitimate, nondenoting terms that can be components of meaningful statements. ${\cal Q}^{\rm u}_{0}…
▽ More
${\cal Q}_0$ is an elegant version of Church's type theory formulated and extensively studied by Peter B. Andrews. Like other traditional logics, ${\cal Q}_0$ does not admit undefined terms. The "traditional approach to undefinedness" in mathematical practice is to treat undefined terms as legitimate, nondenoting terms that can be components of meaningful statements. ${\cal Q}^{\rm u}_{0}$ is a modification of Andrews' type theory ${\cal Q}_0$ that directly formalizes the traditional approach to undefinedness. This paper presents ${\cal Q}^{\rm u}_{0}$ and proves that the proof system of ${\cal Q}^{\rm u}_{0}$ is sound and complete with respect to its semantics which is based on Henkin-style general models. The paper's development of ${\cal Q}^{\rm u}_{0}$ closely follows Andrews' development of ${\cal Q}_0$ to clearly delineate the differences between the two systems.
△ Less
Submitted 29 June, 2014;
originally announced June 2014.
-
Simple Type Theory with Undefinedness, Quotation, and Evaluation
Authors:
William M. Farmer
Abstract:
This paper presents a version of simple type theory called ${\cal Q}^{\rm uqe}_{0}$ that is based on ${\cal Q}_0$, the elegant formulation of Church's type theory created and extensively studied by Peter B. Andrews. ${\cal Q}^{\rm uqe}_{0}$ directly formalizes the traditional approach to undefinedness in which undefined expressions are treated as legitimate, nondenoting expressions that can be com…
▽ More
This paper presents a version of simple type theory called ${\cal Q}^{\rm uqe}_{0}$ that is based on ${\cal Q}_0$, the elegant formulation of Church's type theory created and extensively studied by Peter B. Andrews. ${\cal Q}^{\rm uqe}_{0}$ directly formalizes the traditional approach to undefinedness in which undefined expressions are treated as legitimate, nondenoting expressions that can be components of meaningful statements. ${\cal Q}^{\rm uqe}_{0}$ is also equipped with a facility for reasoning about the syntax of expressions based on quotation and evaluation. Quotation is used to refer to a syntactic value that represents the syntactic structure of an expression, and evaluation is used to refer to the value of the expression that a syntactic value represents. With quotation and evaluation it is possible to reason in ${\cal Q}^{\rm uqe}_{0}$ about the interplay of the syntax and semantics of expressions and, as a result, to formalize in ${\cal Q}^{\rm uqe}_{0}$ syntax-based mathematical algorithms. The paper gives the syntax and semantics of ${\cal Q}^{\rm uqe}_{0}$ as well as a proof system for ${\cal Q}^{\rm uqe}_{0}$. The proof system is shown to be sound for all formulas and complete for formulas that do not contain evaluations. The paper also illustrates some applications of ${\cal Q}^{\rm uqe}_{0}$.
△ Less
Submitted 8 December, 2016; v1 submitted 25 June, 2014;
originally announced June 2014.
-
Realms: A Structure for Consolidating Knowledge about Mathematical Theories
Authors:
Jacques Carette,
William M. Farmer,
Michael Kohlhase
Abstract:
Since there are different ways of axiomatizing and developing a mathematical theory, knowledge about a such a theory may reside in many places and in many forms within a library of formalized mathematics. We introduce the notion of a realm as a structure for consolidating knowledge about a mathematical theory. A realm contains several axiomatizations of a theory that are separately developed. View…
▽ More
Since there are different ways of axiomatizing and developing a mathematical theory, knowledge about a such a theory may reside in many places and in many forms within a library of formalized mathematics. We introduce the notion of a realm as a structure for consolidating knowledge about a mathematical theory. A realm contains several axiomatizations of a theory that are separately developed. Views interconnect these developments and establish that the axiomatizations are equivalent in the sense of being mutually interpretable. A realm also contains an external interface that is convenient for users of the library who want to apply the concepts and facts of the theory without delving into the details of how the concepts and facts were developed. We illustrate the utility of realms through a series of examples. We also give an outline of the mechanisms that are needed to create and maintain realms.
△ Less
Submitted 22 May, 2014;
originally announced May 2014.
-
Frameworks for Reasoning about Syntax that Utilize Quotation and Evaluation
Authors:
William M. Farmer,
Pouya Larjani
Abstract:
It is often useful, if not necessary, to reason about the syntactic structure of an expression in an interpreted language (i.e., a language with a semantics). This paper introduces a mathematical structure called a syntax framework that is intended to be an abstract model of a system for reasoning about the syntax of an interpreted language. Like many concrete systems for reasoning about syntax, a…
▽ More
It is often useful, if not necessary, to reason about the syntactic structure of an expression in an interpreted language (i.e., a language with a semantics). This paper introduces a mathematical structure called a syntax framework that is intended to be an abstract model of a system for reasoning about the syntax of an interpreted language. Like many concrete systems for reasoning about syntax, a syntax framework contains a mapping of expressions in the interpreted language to syntactic values that represent the syntactic structures of the expressions; a language for reasoning about the syntactic values; a mechanism called quotation to refer to the syntactic value of an expression; and a mechanism called evaluation to refer to the value of the expression represented by a syntactic value. A syntax framework provides a basis for integrating reasoning about the syntax of the expressions with reasoning about what the expressions mean. The notion of a syntax framework is used to discuss how quotation and evaluation can be built into a language and to define what quasiquotation is. Several examples of syntax frameworks are presented.
△ Less
Submitted 25 June, 2014; v1 submitted 9 August, 2013;
originally announced August 2013.
-
Chiron: A Set Theory with Types, Undefinedness, Quotation, and Evaluation
Authors:
William M. Farmer
Abstract:
Chiron is a derivative of von-Neumann-Bernays-Gödel (NBG) set theory that is intended to be a practical, general-purpose logic for mechanizing mathematics. Unlike traditional set theories such as Zermelo-Fraenkel (ZF) and NBG, Chiron is equipped with a type system, lambda notation, and definite and indefinite description. The type system includes a universal type, dependent types, dependent functi…
▽ More
Chiron is a derivative of von-Neumann-Bernays-Gödel (NBG) set theory that is intended to be a practical, general-purpose logic for mechanizing mathematics. Unlike traditional set theories such as Zermelo-Fraenkel (ZF) and NBG, Chiron is equipped with a type system, lambda notation, and definite and indefinite description. The type system includes a universal type, dependent types, dependent function types, subtypes, and possibly empty types. Unlike traditional logics such as first-order logic and simple type theory, Chiron admits undefined terms that result, for example, from a function applied to an argument outside its domain or from an improper definite or indefinite description. The most noteworthy part of Chiron is its facility for reasoning about the syntax of expressions. Quotation is used to refer to a set called a construction that represents the syntactic structure of an expression, and evaluation is used to refer to the value of the expression that a construction represents. Using quotation and evaluation, syntactic side conditions, schemas, syntactic transformations used in deduction and computation rules, and other such things can be directly expressed in Chiron. This paper presents the syntax and semantics of Chiron, some definitions and simple examples illustrating its use, a proof system for Chiron, and a notion of an interpretation of one theory of Chiron in another.
△ Less
Submitted 27 May, 2013;
originally announced May 2013.
-
The Formalization of Syntax-Based Mathematical Algorithms Using Quotation and Evaluation
Authors:
William M. Farmer
Abstract:
Algorithms like those for differentiating functional expressions manipulate the syntactic structure of mathematical expressions in a mathematically meaningful way. A formalization of such an algorithm should include a specification of its computational behavior, a specification of its mathematical meaning, and a mechanism for applying the algorithm to actual expressions. Achieving these goals requ…
▽ More
Algorithms like those for differentiating functional expressions manipulate the syntactic structure of mathematical expressions in a mathematically meaningful way. A formalization of such an algorithm should include a specification of its computational behavior, a specification of its mathematical meaning, and a mechanism for applying the algorithm to actual expressions. Achieving these goals requires the ability to integrate reasoning about the syntax of the expressions with reasoning about what the expressions mean. A syntax framework is a mathematical structure that is an abstract model for a syntax reasoning system. It contains a mapping of expressions to syntactic values that represent the syntactic structures of the expressions; a language for reasoning about syntactic values; a quotation mechanism to refer to the syntactic value of an expression; and an evaluation mechanism to refer to the value of the expression represented by a syntactic value. We present and compare two approaches, based on instances of a syntax framework, to formalize a syntax-based mathematical algorithm in a formal theory T. In the first approach the syntactic values for the expressions manipulated by the algorithm are members of an inductive type in T, but quotation and evaluation are functions defined in the metatheory of T. In the second approach every expression in T is represented by a syntactic value, and quotation and evaluation are operators in T itself.
△ Less
Submitted 5 August, 2013; v1 submitted 26 May, 2013;
originally announced May 2013.
-
The MathScheme Library: Some Preliminary Experiments
Authors:
Jacques Carette,
William M. Farmer,
Filip Jeremic,
Vincent Maccio,
Russell O'Connor,
Quang M. Tran
Abstract:
We present some of the experiments we have performed to best test our design for a library for MathScheme, the mechanized mathematics software system we are building. We wish for our library design to use and reflect, as much as possible, the mathematical structure present in the objects which populate the library.
We present some of the experiments we have performed to best test our design for a library for MathScheme, the mechanized mathematics software system we are building. We wish for our library design to use and reflect, as much as possible, the mathematical structure present in the objects which populate the library.
△ Less
Submitted 9 June, 2011;
originally announced June 2011.
