Fail better: What formalized math can teach us about learning
Jo\~ao Marcos

TL;DR
This paper explores how formalized mathematics can inform better teaching and learning of logic by analyzing proof strategies, automation, and proof dynamics, and demonstrates a proof assistant as a proof of concept.
Contribution
It introduces a proof assistant that integrates existing tools and insights from formalized mathematics to enhance logic education and proof understanding.
Findings
Proof strategies and automation are crucial for effective learning.
Proofs should be viewed as dynamic objects, not static trees.
A prototype proof assistant demonstrates practical application of these ideas.
Abstract
Real-life conjectures do not come with instructions saying whether they they should be proven or, instead, refuted. Yet, as we now know, in either case the final argument produced had better be not just convincing but actually verifiable in as much detail as our need for eliminating risk might require. For those who do not happen to have direct access to the realm of mathematical truths, the modern field of formalized mathematics has quite a few lessons to contribute, and one might pay heed to what it has to say, for instance, about: the importance of employing proof strategies; the fine control of automation in unraveling the structure of a certain proof object; reasoning forward from the givens and backward from the goals, in developing proof scripts; knowing when and how definitions and identities apply in a helpful way, and when they do not apply; seeing proofs [and refutations] as…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsLogic, programming, and type systems · Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge · Formal Methods in Verification
