Proof verification and proof discovery for relativity

Synthese 192 (7):2077-2094 (2015)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

The vision of machines autonomously carrying out substantive conjecture generation, theorem discovery, proof discovery, and proof verification in mathematics and the natural sciences has a long history that reaches back before the development of automatic systems designed for such processes. While there has been considerable progress in proof verification in the formal sciences, for instance the Mizar project’ and the four-color theorem, now machine verified, there has been scant such work carried out in the realm of the natural sciences—until recently. The delay in the case of the natural sciences can be attributed to both a lack of formal analysis of the so-called “theories” in such sciences, and the lack of sufficient progress in automated theorem proving. While the lack of analysis is probably due to an inclination toward informality and empiricism on the part of nearly all of the relevant scientists, the lack of progress is to be expected, given the computational hardness of automated theorem proving; after all, theoremhood in even first-order logic is Turing-undecidable. We give in the present short paper a compressed report on our building upon these formal theories using logic-based AI in order to achieve, in relativity, both machine proof discovery and proof verification, for theorems previously established by humans. Our report is intended to serve as a springboard to machine-produced results in the future that have not been obtained by humans.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 91,349

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Similar books and articles

Sequent reconstruction in LLM—A sweepline proof.R. Banach - 1995 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 73 (3):277-295.
The single-conclusion proof logic and inference rules specification.Vladimir N. Krupski - 2001 - Annals of Pure and Applied Logic 113 (1-3):181-206.
Completeness of MLL Proof-Nets w.r.t. Weak Distributivity.Jean-Baptiste Joinet - 2007 - Journal of Symbolic Logic 72 (1):159 - 170.
Descartes's Ontological Proof of God's Existence.Cecilia Wee - 2012 - British Journal for the History of Philosophy 20 (1):23-40.
Argumentative aspects of indirect proof.James Gasser - 1992 - Argumentation 6 (1):41-49.
Dialectic and Indirect Proof.Clark Butler - 1991 - The Monist 74 (3):422-437.
Proof and Sanction in Mill's Utilitarianism.Stephen Cohen - 1990 - History of Philosophy Quarterly 7 (4):475 - 487.
Proof in Mathematics: An Introduction.James Franklin - 1996 - Sydney, Australia: Quakers Hill Press.
A New Proof of the Likelihood Principle.Greg Gandenberger - 2015 - British Journal for the Philosophy of Science 66 (3):475-503.

Analytics

Added to PP
2015-09-01

Downloads
27 (#574,515)

6 months
6 (#504,917)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author Profiles

Selmer Bringsjord
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
Joshua Taylor
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute

References found in this work

Computability and Logic.George Boolos, John Burgess, Richard P. & C. Jeffrey - 1980 - New York: Cambridge University Press. Edited by John P. Burgess & Richard C. Jeffrey.
Computability and Logic.George S. Boolos, John P. Burgess & Richard C. Jeffrey - 2003 - Bulletin of Symbolic Logic 9 (4):520-521.
Computability and Logic.George S. Boolos, John P. Burgess & Richard C. Jeffrey - 1974 - Cambridge, England: Cambridge University Press. Edited by John P. Burgess & Richard C. Jeffrey.
Mathematical logic.Heinz-Dieter Ebbinghaus - 1996 - New York: Springer. Edited by Jörg Flum & Wolfgang Thomas.

View all 16 references / Add more references