J. A. Goguen. Social and semiotic analyses for theorem prover user interface design 1. Formal Aspects of Computing, 11(3):272--301, 1999.  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

No context found.

Goguen, J. (1999b). Social and semiotic analyses for theorem prover user interface design. Formal Aspects of Computing, 11:272-301. Special issue on user interfaces for theorem provers.

....kernel system [28] an Ada configuration manager [40] the MacIntosh QuickDraw program [126] and OBJ itself [20] hardware specification, simulation, and verification (see [144] and Section 4. 8) specification and verification of imperative programs [66] specification of user interface designs [60, 58], and theorem proving [53, 66, 59] several of these were done under a UK government grant. OBJ has also been combined with Petri nets, thus allowing structured data in tokens [5] and was used to verify compilers for parallel programming languages in the esprit sponsored procos project [137, ....

....and prototyping, and is intended to support experimentation with a variety of logics. As this document is being finished, a system called Kumo is being installed at UCSD. Kumo is a proof assistant for first order hidden logic, that also generates websites to document the proofs obtained [65, 64, 78, 60]; it greatly extends the theorem proving power of OBJ, in the logics supported, in the level of automation obtained, and in the user interface, including proof documentation. 1.2 A Brief Summary of Parameterized Programming OBJ has three kinds of entity at its top level: objects, theories, and ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Joseph Goguen. Social and semiotic analyses for theorem prover user interface design, to appear, 2000. Special issue on user interfaces for theorem provers.

....relations are defined similarly [7] There are also more refined orderings, e.g. M 1 vC;s M 2 if M 2 preserves every constructor of sort s that M 1 preserves; and we can define Boolean combinations of all these orderings, to get something appropriate for a particular application. For example, [8] applies these ideas in justifying design decisions for the user interface to a theorem proving system. Note that these quality measures are partial orderings, rather than linear numerical scales; this is appropriate because semiotic spaces are qualitative, in that they are concerned with ....

Joseph Goguen. Social and semiotic analyses for theorem prover user interface design. Formal Aspects of Computing, 11:272--301, 1999. Special issue on user interfaces for theorem provers.

....this paper is to improve the teaching of mathematics, a subject about which there is much controversy, especially for secondary schools. Another motivation is to help design better user interfaces for mechanical theorem proving systems, since our research group at UCSD is building such a system [16, 13, 12]. Section 2 describes the data and methods that are used, Section 3 discusses related literature, Sections 4 and 5 consider how mathematical objects and assertions are introduced, Section 6 considers how they are referenced, and the nature of abstraction, Section 7 describes the discourse ....

....evaluative material (with motivation, explanations, etc. is interleaved with proof steps, which are presented in the converse order (unless the prover specifies otherwise) there is also an optional closing page, which can summarize what has been proved and what can be learned from the proof [13]. Feedback received from students and nonprofessionals has been very positive, although professional mathematicians often consider the problem of improved exposition to be uninteresting. Much more could be said on the topics of this section, for example, about proof navigation, but this would ....

Joseph Goguen. Social and semiotic analyses for theorem prover user interface design. Formal Aspects of Computing, 11:272--301, 1999. Special issue on user interfaces for theorem provers.

....In order to improve this dismal situation, we suggest that the motivation and structure of proofs should be made explicit, and that relevant background and tutorial material should be integrated with proofs. These recommendations follow ideas from cognitive psychology, narratology and semiotics [11,12], as discussed further in Section 3. In particular, the structure of the Tatami system proof websites was designed using algebraic semiotics, which combines algebraic specification with social semiotics in the sense of [10] The present paper is an extension, revision and amalgamation of work ....

....it is therefore natural to study them using semiotic morphisms which map from the sign system of the given information to that of its display; the quality of the interface is then measured by the quality of its semiotic morphism. Details, some of which are surprisingly technical, may be found in [12] and [11] 3.2. Narratology Typical proofs in modern mathematics hide the often considerable conflicts that were involved in their construction, since finding a non trivial proof usually requires exploring many misconceptions and errors, some of which may be very subtle. We claim that proofs can ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Joseph Goguen. Social and semiotic analyses for theorem prover user interface design. Formal Aspects of Computing, 11:272--301, 1999. Special issue on user interfaces for theorem provers.

....and integrating them with relevant background and tutorial material. These recommendations are consistent with ideas from cognitive psychology, narratology and semiotics, as discussed further in Section 3. In particular, the structure of proof websites was designed using algebraic semiotics [11, 12], which combines algebraic specification with social semiotics in the sense of [10] Algebraic semiotics provides a way to formalize user interface designs and to compare them for quality, based on how well they represent what is important in the underlying functionality; although it uses formal ....

....of assertions 1 . 6. It heavily uses recent web and Internet technologies. 7. It supports the design and validation of concurrent object oriented systems through its facilities for behavioral specification, based on hidden algebra. This paper extends, updates and amalgamates work reported in [12, 15] and other papers. The latest information on the Tatami project can always be found at its URL, www.cs.ucsd.edu groups tatami. 2 Tatami System Design This section sketches the Tatami system design, including: 1. its central component, the Kumo 2 proof assistant and website generator (see ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Joseph Goguen. Social and semiotic analyses for theorem prover user interface design. Formal Aspects of Computing, 11:272--301, 1999. Special issue on user interfaces for theorem provers.

....In order to improve this dismal situation, we suggest that the motivation and structure of proofs should be made explicit, and that relevant background and tutorial material should be integrated with proofs. These recommendations follow ideas from cognitive psychology, narratology and semiotics [11, 12], as discussed further in Section 3. In particular, the structure of Tatami system s proof website was designed using algebraic semiotics, which combines algebraic specification with social semiotics in the sense of [10] The present paper is an extension, revision and amalgamation of work ....

....it is therefore natural to study them using semiotic morphisms which map from the sign system of the given information to that of its display; the quality of the interface is then measured by the quality of its semiotic morphism. Details, some of which are surprisingly technical, may be found in [12] and [11] 3.2 Narratology Typical proofs in modern mathematics hide the often considerable conflicts that were involved in their construction, since finding a non trivial proof usually requires exploring many misconceptions and errors, some of which may be very subtle. We claim that proofs can ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Joseph Goguen. Social and semiotic analyses for theorem prover user interface design. Formal Aspects of Computing, 11:272--301, 1999. Special issue on user interfaces for theorem provers.

No context found.

J. A. Goguen. Social and semiotic analyses for theorem prover user interface design 1. Formal Aspects of Computing, 11(3):272--301, 1999.

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC