Y. Bertot and L. Thery. A Generic Approach to Building User Interfaces for Theorem Provers. the Journal of Symbolic Computation, Vol. 25, pages 161-- 194, 1998.  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....proof obligations arising in particular specification mechanisms (see also the related discussion in 7.5. 1) Moreover, analyzing term structure by higher order matching serves as a viable replacement for direct term manipulation , potentially with heavy userinterface support, as proposed in [Bertot and Thery, 1996] [Bertot et al. 1997] In contrast to interactive manipulations performed at run time by the user, casual abbreviations in Isar may easily document advanced structural decompositions within the primary text, just by a few # term patterns. 3.4.2 Formal comments and antiquotations From the ....

Y. Bertot and L. Thery. A generic approach to building user interfaces for theorem provers. Journal of Symbolic Computation, 11, 1996.

....by mathematical or some graphical notation like square roots or sum signs. In a GUI, there is a potential for novel user interaction such as query by pointing (clicking on a subterm in order to get information like types) or prove by pointing (clicking on a subterm to apply a tactic or rewrite) (Bertot Th ery, 1998). Finally, direct manipulation is a straightforward idea enabling the user to drag drop a subterm within a sum, effecting appropriate applications of associativity and commutativity laws (going back to the system Theorist; see also (Bertot, 1997a) which are, at least in Isabelle, extremely ....

....can be configured by the user at runtime, script based replay, and further direct manipulation like rewriting by drag drop, Coq, which on the other hand is not generic. CtCoq is actually part of a larger initiative, in spirit similar to ours, to provide generic interfaces for a family of provers (Bertot Th ery, 1998). The generic interface is implemented using the Centaur system (Borras et al. 1988) In contrast to our architecture, the system is distributed (prover and interface can run on different machines) and heterogeneous (prover and interface need not be implemented in the same language) In our view, ....

Bertot, Y., & Th'ery, L. (1998). A generic approach to building user interfaces for theorem provers. Journal for symbolic computation, 25(2), 161-- 194.

....by mathematical or some graphical notation like square roots or sum signs. In a GUI, there is a potential for novel user interaction such as query by pointing (clicking on a subterm in order to get information like types) or prove by pointing (clicking on a subterm to apply a tactic or rewrite) (Bertot Th ery, 1998). Finally, direct manipulation is a straightforward idea enabling the user to drag drop a subterm within a sum, effecting appropriate applications of associativity and commutativity laws (going back to the system Theorist ; see also (Bertot, 1997a) which are, at least in Isabelle, extremely ....

....and moreover supports graphical output which can be configured by the user at runtime, script based replay, and further direct manipulation like rewriting by drag drop. CtCoq is actually part of a larger initiative, in spirit similar to ours, to provide generic interfaces for a family of provers (Bertot Th ery, 1998). The generic interface is implemented using the Centaur system (Borras et al. 1988) In contrast to our architecture, the system is distributed (prover and interface can run on different machines) and heterogeneous (prover and interface need not be implemented in the same language) This work ....

Bertot, Y., & Th'ery, L. (1998). A generic approach to building user interfaces for theorem provers. Journal for symbolic computation, 25(2), 161-- 194.

....tactical combinators, no intermediate proof nodes are ever kept. A second, graphical, user interface is under development. This user interface consists of two parts: the rst is programmed in Java and provides additional user assistance through the implementation of modern theorem prover features [4] such as proof by pointing (to suggest, based on the proof context, the next proof rule to apply) a more structured database of lemmata, proof recording and playback, etc. The second component of the graphical user interface is used to visualize and navigate through the proof graph, and is ....

Y. Bertot and L. Thery. A generic approach to building user interfaces for theorem provers. Journal of Symbolic Computation, 25(7):161-194, February 1998.

....proving. Furthermore, proofs cannot be freely arranged according to usual natural deduction practice. Apart from declarative or intelligible theorem proving, there are several further approaches to provide human access to formal proof. Obviously, user interfaces for theorem provers (e.g. [3]) would be of great help in performing interactive proofs. Yet there is always a pending danger of overemphasizing advanced interaction mechanisms instead of adding high level concepts to the underlying system. For example, proof by pointing o#ers the user a nice way to select subterms with the ....

Y. Bertot and L. Thery. A generic approach to building user interfaces for theorem provers. Journal of Symbolic Computation, 11, 1996.

....by mathematical or some graphical notation like square roots or sum signs. In a GUI, there is a potential for novel user interaction such as query by pointing (clicking on a subterm in order to get information like types) or prove by pointing (clicking on a subterm to fire a tactic or rewrite) (Bertot Th ery, 1998). Finally, direct manipulation is a straightforward idea enabling the user to drag drop a subterm within a sum, effecting appropriate applications of associativity and commutativity laws (going back to the system Theorist; see also (Bertot, 1997a) which are, at least in Isabelle, extremely ....

....can be configured by the user at runtime, script based replay, and further direct manipulation like rewriting by drag drop, Coq, which on the other hand is not generic. CtCoq is actually part of a larger initiative, in spirit similar to ours, to provide a generic interface for a family of provers (Bertot Th ery, 1998). This generic interface is implemented using the Centaur system (Borras et al. 1988) In contrast to our architecture, the system is distributed (prover and interface can run on different machines) and heterogeneous (prover and interface need not be implemented in the same language) In our ....

Bertot, Y., & Th'ery, L. (1998). A generic approach to building user interfaces for theorem provers. Journal for symbolic computation, 25(2), 161-- 194.

....Naval Research. We also thank Stuart Allen and Karl Crary for the discussions and input concerning this topic and Karla Consroe for help in preparing the document. References [1] Stuart F. Allen. A non type theoretic semantics for type theoretic language. PhD thesis, Cornell University, 1987. [2] Y. Bertot, G. Kahn, and L. Th ery. Proof by pointing. In Theoretical Aspects of Computer Software, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, volume 789, pages 141 160, 1994. 3] E. Bishop. Foundations of Constructive Analysis. McGraw Hill, NY, 1967. 4] P. Borras, D. Cl ement, T. Despeyroux, J. ....

Y. Bertot and L. Th'ery. A generic approach to building user interfaces for theorem provers. J. Symbolic Computation, Vol. 11, 1994.

No context found.

Y. Bertot and L. Thery. A Generic Approach to Building User Interfaces for Theorem Provers. the Journal of Symbolic Computation, Vol. 25, pages 161-- 194, 1998.

No context found.

Yves Bertot and Laurent Th#ry. A generic approach to building user interfaces for theorem provers. To appear in Journal of Symbolic Computation.

....generic interactive programming environment generator Centaur [6] The new graphical interface is programmed in a dioeerent language, Java, and most of the design decisions that had been made for CtCoq have been re considered. The CtCoq system advocated a few basic principles, mainly described in [15, 4, 2]: the user interface is a separate process from the logical engine, Coq [1] the logical data in the user interface is manipulated as structured, tree like data, and the user interface manipulates the sequence of commands sent to the logical engine as a complete document, the consistency of which ....

Yves Bertot and Laurent Th#ry. A generic approach to building user interfaces for theorem provers. Journal of Symbolic Computation, 25:161194, 1998.

....had been used for the experiment presented in [7] The result is a collection of proof script les totalling 8,000 lines. The CtCoq user interface, a tool to help develop and maintain large proofs in Coq was instrumental in this endeavour, especially with its dragand drop [5] and script management [8] facilities. Re running these proof scripts through the Coq system, version 6.2.1, takes approximately a quarter of an hour on a reaonnably powerful machine (Pentium, 333 MHz, 128 MBytes) The whole proof development can be found from the author s web page at INRIA Sophia Antipolis. The work on ....

Yves Bertot and Laurent Th#ry. A generic approach to building user interfaces for theorem provers. To appear in Journal of Symbolic Computation.

.... de plusieurs processus, l aOEchage de donn#es, l interaction # la souris, et la gestion de scripts Mots cl#s : D#monstration automatique, D#veloppement interactif de preuves, Interfaces graphiques, CtCoq, preuve par s#lection The CtCoq System: Design and Architecture 3 1 Introduction In [TBK92, BT98] we claim that computer aided deduction systems need powerful userinterfaces and we lay out general techniques to construct such user interfaces, based on a multi process architecture and tools coming from programming environments. Following these ideas, we have developed a specic user interface ....

....training than is usually required for a graphical user interface. Still we RR n# 3540 4 Yves Bertot claim that this approach made it possible to explore many interaction methods, which a more iprincipledj design would have ignored. In this paper, we want to review the principles enumerated in [BT98] see how these principles are instantiated in the case of CtCoq, and describe the extensions that were devised for this experience. This paper is structured as follows. We rst review related work. Then we describe the architecture of the CtCoq system. Then, we review the characteristics of data ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Yves Bertot and Laurent Th#ry. A generic approach to building user interfaces for theorem provers. Journal of Symbolic Computation, 25:161194, 1998.

....the abstract syntax tree at which this subterm is rooted. For example, the command Goal A,B: Prop (f (A B) f A f B) fully annotated, 2 becomes: Start of Goals 0 : 1 [1 1 A] 1 2 B] 2 Prop] 3 [3 2 1 ( 3 2 1 1 f ] 3 2 1 2 1 ( 3 2 1 2 1 2 1 A] [3 2 1 2 1 1 ] [3 2 1 2 1 2 2 B] 3 1 ] 3 2 2 ( 3 2 2 2 1 [3 2 2 2 1 1 f ] 3 2 2 2 1 2 1 A] 3 2 2 1 ] 3 2 2 2 2 [3 2 2 2 2 1 f ] 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 B] End of Goals 2 The annotations used in practice are selected to be eOEciently parsable, and have been replaced here by ....

.... (f A f B) fully annotated, 2 becomes: Start of Goals 0 : 1 [1 1 A] 1 2 B] 2 Prop] 3 [3 2 1 ( 3 2 1 1 f ] 3 2 1 2 1 ( 3 2 1 2 1 2 1 A] 3 2 1 2 1 1 ] 3 2 1 2 1 2 2 B] 3 1 ] 3 2 2 ( 3 2 2 2 1 [3 2 2 2 1 1 f ] 3 2 2 2 1 2 1 A] [3 2 2 1 ] [3 2 2 2 2 [3 2 2 2 2 1 f ] 3 2 2 2 2 2 1 B] End of Goals 2 The annotations used in practice are selected to be eOEciently parsable, and have been replaced here by more readable characters RR n Sigma3286 10 Yves Bertot, Thomas Kleymann Schreiber, Dilip Sequeira XXXXXXXX i ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Yves Bertot and Laurent Th#ry. A generic approach to building user interfaces for theorem provers. To appear in Journal of Symbolic Computation.

....has led to many implementations of proof systems [1315,7] Work on proof by pointing is the initial incentive for this work on tactic optimisation. Proof by pointing, where commands are generated from an inter 3 pretation of locations selected by the user, has been formally described in [2] and [4]. It has been implemented in several experiments of proof environments, based on a variety of proof systems: Isabelle [20] HOL [21] a theorem prover developped in prolog [8] and Coq [13] all using a structure editor [22,5] to facilitate the input of mouse location information. Although the ....

Yves Bertot and Laurent Th#ry. A generic approach to building user interfaces for theorem provers. To appear in Journal of Symbolic Computation.

....that enable rewriting. For instance, the cHOL system [5] provides a tool that selects all the rewrite theorems that apply to a given pattern. In the user interface we use as a test bed [1] mouse interaction is already provided in the form of proof by pointing [2] and point and shoot extensions [3]. Other paradigms that use the mouse to limit the scope of operations include window inference [4] 3 Implementation and mode of operation 3.1 Basic data structures Our implementation uses a direct representation of mathematical formulae as trees, with a layout mechanism that displays these ....

Yves Bertot and Laurent Th#ry. A generic approach to building user interfaces for theorem provers. To appear in Journal of Symbolic Computation.

No context found.

Yves Bertot and Laurent Thery. A generic approach to building user interfaces for theorem provers. Journal of Symbolic Computation, 25(7):161-194, February 1998.

No context found.

Yves Bertot and Laurent Thery. A generic approach to building user interfaces for theorem provers. Journal of Symbolic Computation, 25(7):161--194, February 1998.

No context found.

Y. Bertot and L. Thery. A generic approach to building user interfaces for theorem provers. Journal of Symbolic Computation, 25(7):161-194, February 1998.

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