Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in
Book cover

Thirty Five Years of Automating Mathematics pp 271–314Cite as

Proof Development with Ωmega: The Irrationality of \(\sqrt 2\)

  • Chapter

Part of the book series: Applied Logic Series ((APLS,volume 28))

Abstract

The well-known theorem asserting the irrationality of \(\sqrt 2\) was proposed as a case study for a comparison of fifteen (interactive) theorem proving systems [Wiedijk, 2002]. This represents an important shift of emphasis in the field of automated deduction away from the somehow artificial problems of the past back to real mathematical challenges.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. S. Allen, R. Constable, R. Eaton, C. Kreitz, and L. Lorigo. The Nupri open logical environment. In McAllester [ 2000 ].

    Google Scholar 

  2. P. Andrews, M. Bishop, S. Issar, D Nesmith, F. Pfenning, and H. Xi. TPS: A theorem proving system for classical type theory. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 16 (3): 321–353, 1996.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. R. Bartle and D. Sherbert. Introduction to Real Analysis. Wiley, 2nd edition, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  4. P. Baumgartner and U. Furbach. PROTEIN, a PROver with a Theory INterface. In Bundy [ 1994 ], pages 769–773.

    Google Scholar 

  5. C. Benzmüller and M. Kohlhase. LEO — a higher-order theorem prover. In Kirchner and Kirchner [ 1998 ].

    Google Scholar 

  6. C. Benzmüller and V. Sorge. A blackboard architecture for guiding interactive proofs. In Giunchiglia [ 1998 ].

    Google Scholar 

  7. C. Benzmüller and V. Sorge. SZ-ANTS - An open approach at combining Interactive and Automated Theorem Proving. In Kerber and Kohlhase [ 2000 ].

    Google Scholar 

  8. C. Benzmüller, M. Bishop, and V. Sorge. Integrating TPS and f2MEGA. Journal of Universal Computer Science, 5: 188–207, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Benzmüller et al.,2002] C. Benzmüller, A. Fiedler, A. Meier, and M. Pollet. Irrationality off — a case study in ftMEGA. Seki-Report SR-02–03, Department of Computer Science, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Benzmüller et al.,2003] C. Benzmüller, A. Meier, and V. Sorge. Bridging theorem proving and mathematical knowledge retrieval. In Festschrift in Honour of Jörg Siekmann’s 609 Birthday,LNAI. Springer, 2003. To appear.

    Google Scholar 

  11. C. Benzmüller. Equality and Extensionality in Higher-Order Theorem Proving. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  12. M. Bishop and P. Andrews. Selectively instantiating definitions. In Kirchner and Kirchner [ 1998 ].

    Google Scholar 

  13. W. Bledsoe. Challenge problems in elementary calculus. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 6: 341–359, 1990.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. N. Bourbaki. Theory of sets. His Elements of mathematics, 1. Paris, Hermann Reading Mass., Addison-Wesley, 1968.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Bundy et al.,1990] A. Bundy, F. van Harmelen, C. Horn, and A. Smaill. The Oyster-Clam System. In M. Stickel, editor, Proceedings of the 10th Conference on Automated Deduction,number 449 in LNCS, pages 647–648, Kaiserslautern, Germany, 1990. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  16. A. Bundy. The use of explicit plans to guide inductive proofs. In Lusk and Overbeek [ 1988 ], pages 111–120.

    Google Scholar 

  17. A. Bundy, editor. Proceedings of the 12th Conference on Automated Deduction, number 814 in LNAI. Springer, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  18. A. Bundy. A critique of proof planning. In Computational Logic: LogicProgramming and Beyond, number 2408 in LNCS, pages 160–177. Springer, 2002

    Google Scholar 

  19. Char et al.,1992] B. Char, K. Geddes, G. Gonnet, B. Leong, M. Monagan, and S. Watt. First leaves: a tutorial introduction to Maple V. Springer, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  20. L. Cheikhrouhou and J. Siekmann. Planning diagonalization proofs. In Giunchiglia [ 1998 ], pages 167–180.

    Google Scholar 

  21. L. Cheikhrouhou and V. Sorge. PDS — A Three-Dimensional Data Structure for Proof Plans. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial and Computational Intelligence for Decision, Control and Automation in Engineering and Industrial Applications (ACIDCA ‘2000), Monastir, Tunisia, 22–24 March 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  22. A. Church. A Formulation of the Simple Theory of Types. The Journal of Symbolic Logic, 5: 56–68, 1940.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  23. Coq Development Team, 1999–2003] Coq Development Team. The Coq Proof Assistant Reference Manual. INRIA 1999–2003. See http://coq.inria.fr/doc/main.html.

    Google Scholar 

  24. H. de Nivelle. Bliksem 1.10 user manual. Technical report, MaxPlanck-Institut fr Informatik, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Doris, 2001] The Doris system is available at http://ww.cogsci.ed.ac.uk/~jbos/doris/.

  26. M. Drummond. On precondition achievement and the computational economics of automatic planning. In Current Trends in AI Planning, pages 6–13. IOS Press, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  27. A. Fiedler. R rex: An interactive proof explainer. In Goré et al. [ 2001 ].

    Google Scholar 

  28. A. Fiedler. Dialog-driven adaptation of explanations of proofs. In B. Nebel, editor, Proceedings of the 17th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pages 1295–1300, Seattle, WA, 2001. Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar 

  29. A. Fiedler. User-adaptive proof explanation. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  30. R.E. Fikes and N.J. Nilsson. STRIPS: A new approach to the application of theorem proving to problem solving. Artificial Intelligence, 2: 189–208, 1971.

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  31. R. R. Fikes, P. E. Hart, and N. J. Nilsson. Learning and executing generalized robot plans. Artificial Intelligence, 3: 251–288, 1972.

    Google Scholar 

  32. A. Franke and M. Kohlhase. System description: MBAsE, an open mathematical knowledge base. In McAllester [ 2000 ].

    Google Scholar 

  33. H. Ganzinger, editor. Proceedings of the 16th Conference on Automated Deduction, number 1632 in LNAI. Springer, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  34. H. Gebhard. Beweisplanung für die Beweise der Vollständigkeit verschiedener Resolutionskalküle in SIMEGA. Master’s thesis, Department of Computer Science, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  35. G. Gentzen. Untersuchungen über das logische Schließen I XXXXXX II. Mathematische Zeitschrift, 39: 176–210, 572–595, 1935.

    Google Scholar 

  36. F. Giunchiglia, editor. Proceedings of 8th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence: Methodology, Systems, Applications (AIMSA’98), number 1480 in LNAI. Springer, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  37. M. Gordon and T. Melham. Introduction to HOL - A theorem proving environment for higher order logic. Cambridge University Press, 1993.

    Google Scholar 

  38. R. Goré, A. Leitsch, and T. Nipkow, editors. Automated Reasoning — ist International Joint Conference, IJCAR 2001, number 2083 in LNAI. Springer, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  39. J. Hadamard. The Psychology of Invention in the Mathematical Field. Dover Publications, New York, USA; edition 1949, 1944.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Th. Hillenbrand, A. Jaeger, and B. Löchner. System description: Waldmeister — improvements in performance and ease of use. In Ganzinger [ 1999 ], pages 232–236.

    Google Scholar 

  41. X. Huang. Reconstructing Proofs at the Assertion Level. In Bundy [ 1994 ], pages 738–752.

    Google Scholar 

  42. A. Ireland and A. Bundy. Productive use of failure in inductive proof. Journal of Automated Reasoning, 16 (1–2): 79–111, 1996.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. M. Kerber and M. Kohlhase, editors. 8th Symposium on the Integration of Symbolic Computation and Mechanized Reasoning (Calculemus2000). AK Peters, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  44. C. Kirchner and H. Kirchner, editors. Proceedings of the 15th Conference on Automated Deduction, number 1421 in LNAI. Springer, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  45. H. Kirchner and C. Ringeissen, editors. Frontiers of combining systems: Third International Workshop, FroCoS 2000, volume 1794 of LNAL Springer, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  46. M. Kohlhase and A. Franke. MBAsE: Representing knowledge and context for the integration of mathematical software systems. Journal of Symbolic Computation; Special Issue on the Integration of Computer Algebra and Deduction Systems, 32 (4): 365–402, September 2001.

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  47. E. Lusk and R. Overbeek, editors. Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Automated Deduction, number 310 in LNCS, Argonne, Illinois, USA, 1988. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  48. R. Manthey and F. Bry. SATCHMO: A theorem prover implemented in Prolog. In Lusk and Overbeek [ 1988 ], pages 415–434.

    Google Scholar 

  49. D. McAllester, editor. Proceedings of the 17th Conference on Automated Deduction, number 1831 in LNAI. Springer, 2000.

    Google Scholar 

  50. W. W. McCune. Otter 3.0 reference manual and guide. Technical Report ANL-94–6, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois 60439, USA, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  51. W. McCune. Solution of the Robbins problem. Journal of AutomatedReasoning, 19 (3): 263–276, 1997.

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  52. A. Meier and V. Sorge. Exploring properties of residue classes. In Kerber and Kohlhase [ 2000 ].

    Google Scholar 

  53. A. Meier, M. Pollet, and V. Sorge. Classifying Isomorphic Residue Classes. In R. Moreno-Diaz, B. Buchberger, and J.-L. Freire, editors, A Selection of Papers from the 8th International Workshop on Computer Aided Systems Theory (EuroCAST 2001), number 2178 in LNCS, pages 494–508. Springer, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  54. A. Meier, E. Melis, and M. Pollet. Towards extending domain representations. Seki Report SR-02–01, Department of Computer Science, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  55. A. Meier, M. Pollet, and V. Sorge. Comparing Approaches to the Exploration of the Domain of Residue Classes. Journal of Symbolic Computation, Special Issue on the Integration of Automated Reasoning and Computer Algebra Systems, 34(4):287–306, October 2002. Steve Linton and Roberto Sebastiani, eds.

    Google Scholar 

  56. A. Meier. TRAMP: Transformation of Machine-Found Proofs into Natural Deduction Proofs at the Assertion Level. In McAllester [ 2000 ].

    Google Scholar 

  57. A. Meier. Proof Planning with Multiple Strategies. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany, 2003.

    Google Scholar 

  58. E. Melis and A. Meier. Proof planning with multiple strategies. In J. Loyd, V. Dahl, U. Furbach, M. Kerber, K. Lau, C. Palamidessi, L.M. Pereira, Y. Sagivand, and P. Stuckey, editors, First International Conference on Computational Logic (CL-2000), number 1861 in LNAI, pages 644–659, London, UK, 2000. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  59. E. Melia and J. Siekmann. Knowledge-based proof planning. Artificial Intelligence, 115 (1): 65–105, 1999.

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  60. E. Melia, J. Zimmer, and T. Müller. Integrating constraint solving into proof planning. In Kirchner and Ringeissen [ 2000 ].

    Google Scholar 

  61. E. Melia. Island planning and refinement. Seki-Report SR-96–10, Department of Computer Science, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  62. Erica Melis. AI-techniques in proof planning. In H. Prade, editor, Proceedings of the 13th European Conference on Artifical Intelligence, pages 494–498, Brighton, UK, 1998. John Wiley XXXXXX Sons, Chichester, UK.

    Google Scholar 

  63. A. Newell and H. Simon. GPS: A program that simulates human thought. In E. Feigenbaum and J. Feldman, editors, Computers and Thought, pages 279–296. McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, 1963.

    Google Scholar 

  64. Tobias Nipkow, Lawrence C. Paulson, and Markus Wenzel. Isabelle/HOL: A Proof Assistant for Higher-Order Logic. Number 2283 in LNCS. Springer, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  65. Owre et al.,1996] S. Owre, S. Rajan, J.M. Rushby, N. Shankar, and M. Srivas. PVS: Combining specification, proof checking, and model checking. In R. Alur and T. Hen-zinger, editors, Computer-Aided Verification, CAV ‘86,number 1102 in LNCS, pages 411–414, New Brunswick, NJ, 1996. Springer.

    Google Scholar 

  66. L. Paulson. Isabelle: A Generic Theorem Prover. Number 828 in LNCS. Springer, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  67. G. Polya. How to Solve it. Princeton University Press, 1973.

    Google Scholar 

  68. A. Riazanov and A. Voronkov. Vampire 1.1 (system description). In Goré et al. [ 2001 ].

    Google Scholar 

  69. J. Richardson, A. Smaill, and I. Green. System description: Proof planning in higher-order logic with AClam. In Kirchner and Kirchner [ 1998 ].

    Google Scholar 

  70. M. Schönert et al. GAP - Groups, Algorithms, and Programming. Lehrstuhl D für Mathematik, Rheinisch Westfälische Technische Hochschule, Aachen, Germany, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  71. J. Siekmann, S. Hess, C. Benzmüller, L. Cheikhrouhou, A. Fiedler, H. Horacek, M. Kohlhase, K. Konrad, A. Meier, E. Melis, M. Pollet, and V. Sorge. LOUT: Lovely S2MEGA User Interface. Formal Aspects of Computing, 11: 326–342, 1999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  72. Siekmann et al.,2002] J. Siekmann, C. Benzmüller, V. Brezhnev, L. Cheikhrouhou, A. Fiedler, A. Franke, H. Horacek, M. Kohlhase, A. Meier, E. Melis, M. Moschner, I. Normann, M. Pollet, V. Sorge, C. Ullrich, C.-P. Wirth, and J. Zimmer. Proof development with S1MEGA. In Voronkov [2002], pages 143–148.

    Google Scholar 

  73. V. Sorge. Non-Trivial Computations in Proof Planning. In Kirchner and Ringeissen [ 2000 ].

    Google Scholar 

  74. V. Sorge. fl-ANTS — A Blackboard Architecture for the Integration of Reasoning Techniques into Proof Planning. PhD thesis, Department of Computer Science, Saarland University, Saarbrücken, Germany, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  75. G. Sutcliffe, C. Suttner, and T. Yemenis. The TPTP problem library. In Bundy [ 1994 ].

    Google Scholar 

  76. Voetal., 2003] B. Quoc Vo, C. Benzmüller, and S. Autexier. Assertion application in theorem proving and proof planning. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI),Acapulco, Mexico, 2003. (poster description).

    Google Scholar 

  77. A. Voronkov, editor. Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Automated Deduction, number 2392 in LNAI. Springer, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  78. C. Weidenbach, B. Afshordel, U. Brahm, C. Cohrs, Th. Engel, E. Keen, C. Theobalt, and D. Topic. System description: SPASS version 1.0.0. In Ganzinger [ 1999 ], pages 378–382.

    Google Scholar 

  79. D. Weld. An introduction to least commitment planning. AI Magazine, 15 (4): 27–61, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  80. F. Wiedijk. The fifteen provers of the world. Unpublished Draft, 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  81. J. Zhang and H. Zhang. SEM: A system for enumerating models. In C. S. Mellish, editor, Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), pages 298–303, Montreal, Canada, 1995. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo, California, USA.

    Google Scholar 

  82. J. Zimmer and M. Kohlhase. System description: The Mathweb Software Bus for distributed mathematical reasoning. In Voronkov [ 2002 ], pages 138–142.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors
  1. Jörg Siekmann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christoph Benzmüller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Armin Fiedler
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Andreas Meier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Immanuel Normann
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Martin Pollet
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Mathematical and Computer Sciences, Heriot-Watt University, Mountbatten Building, EH 14 4AS, Riccarton, Edinburgh, Scotland, UK

    Fairouz D. Kamareddine

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2003 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Siekmann, J., Benzmüller, C., Fiedler, A., Meier, A., Normann, I., Pollet, M. (2003). Proof Development with Ωmega: The Irrationality of \(\sqrt 2\) . In: Kamareddine, F.D. (eds) Thirty Five Years of Automating Mathematics. Applied Logic Series, vol 28. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0253-9_11

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-0253-9_11

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht

  • Print ISBN: 978-90-481-6440-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-94-017-0253-9

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation