On Automating Diagrammatic Proofs of Arithmetic Arguments
 Mateja Jamnik,
 Alan Bundy,
 Ian Green
 … show all 3 hide
Rent the article at a discount
Rent now* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.
Get AccessAbstract
Theorems in automated theorem proving are usually proved by formal logical proofs. However, there is a subset of problems which humans can prove by the use of geometric operations on diagrams, so called diagrammatic proofs. Insight is often more clearly perceived in these proofs than in the corresponding algebraic proofs; they capture an intuitive notion of truthfulness that humans find easy to see and understand. We are investigating and automating such diagrammatic reasoning about mathematical theorems. Concrete, rather than general diagrams are used to prove particular concrete instances of the universally quantified theorem. The diagrammatic proof is captured by the use of geometric operations on the diagram. These operations are the “inference steps” of the proof. An abstracted schematic proof of the universally quantified theorem is induced from these proof instances. The constructive ωrule provides the mathematical basis for this step from schematic proofs to theoremhood. In this way we avoid the difficulty of treating a general case in a diagram. One method of confirming that the abstraction of the schematic proof from the proof instances is sound is proving the correctness of schematic proofs in the metatheory of diagrams. These ideas have been implemented in the system, called Diamond, which is presented here.
 Baker, S., Ireland, A., and Smaill, A., 1992, “On the use of the constructive omega rule within automated deduction,” pp. 214–225 in International Conference on Logic Programming and Automated Reasoning – LPAR 92, St. Petersburg, A. Voronkov, ed., Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 624, Berlin: SpringerVerlag.
 BarkerPlummer, D. and Bailin, S.C., 1997, “The role of diagrams in mathematical proofs,” Machine Graphics and Vision 6(1), 25–56.
 Barwise, J. and Etchemendy, J., 1991, “Visual information and valid reasoning,” pp. 9–24 in Visualization in Teaching and Learning Mathematics, W. Zimmerman and S. Cunningham, eds., Washington, DC: The Mathematical Association of America.
 Chandrasekaran, B., Glasgow, J., and Narayanan, N.H., eds., 1995, Diagrammatic Reasoning: Cognitive and Computational Perspectives, Washington, DC/Cambridge, MA: AAAI Press/The MIT Press.
 Gelernter, H., 1963, “Realization of a geometry theoremproving machine,” pp. 134–152 in Computers and Thought, E. Feigenbaum and J. Feldman, eds., New York: McGrawHill.
 Hammer, E.M., 1995, Logic and Visual Information, Stanford, CA: Center for the Study of Language and Information.
 Jamnik, M., 1999, “Automating diagrammatic proofs of arithmetic arguments,” Ph.D. Thesis, available from Edinburgh University.
 Jamnik, M., Bundy, A., and Green, I., 1997, “Automation of diagrammatic reasoning,” pp. 528–533 in Proceedings of the 15th IJCAI, Vol. 1, International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, M.E. Pollack, ed., San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers. Also published in the Proceedings of the 1997 AAAI Fall Symposium. Also available from Edinburgh University as DAI Research Paper No. 873.
 Koedinger, K.R. and Anderson, J.R., 1990, “Abstract planning and perceptual chunks,” Cognitive Science 14, 511–550. Reprinted in J. Glasgow, N.H. Narayanan, and B. Chandrasekaran, eds., Diagrammatic Reasoning: Cognitive and Computational Perspectives, Washington, DC/Cambridge, MA: AAAI Press/The MIT Press, 1995, pp. 577625.
 Larkin, J.H. and Simon, H.A., 1987, “Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words,” Cognitive Science 11, 65–99. Reprinted in J. Glasgow, N.H. Narayanan, and B. Chandrasekaran, eds., Diagrammatic Reasoning: Cognitive and Computational Perspectives, Washington, DC/Cambridge, MA: AAAI Press/The MIT Press, 1995, pp. 69109.
 Nelsen, R.B., 1993, Proofs without Words: Exercises in Visual Thinking, Washington, DC: The Mathematical Association of America.
 Pólya, G., 1945, How to Solve It, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
 Pólya, G., 1965, Mathematical Discovery, two volumes, New York: John Wiley & Sons
 Shin, S.J., 1995, The Logical Status of Diagrams, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
 Simon, H.A., 1996, The Sciences of the Artificial, third edition, Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press.
 Sowa, J., 1984, Conceptual Structures: Information Processing in Mind and Machine, Reading, MA: AddisonWesley.
 Stenning, K. and Oberlander, J., 1995, “A cognitive theory of graphical and linguistic reasoning: Logic and implementation,” Cognitive Science 19, 97–140.
 Title
 On Automating Diagrammatic Proofs of Arithmetic Arguments
 Journal

Journal of Logic, Language and Information
Volume 8, Issue 3 , pp 297321
 Cover Date
 19990701
 DOI
 10.1023/A:1008323427489
 Print ISSN
 09258531
 Online ISSN
 15729583
 Publisher
 Kluwer Academic Publishers
 Additional Links
 Topics
 Keywords

 automated reasoning
 diagrammatic reasoning
 theorem proving
 Authors

 Mateja Jamnik ^{(1)}
 Alan Bundy ^{(1)}
 Ian Green ^{(1)}
 Author Affiliations

 1. Division of Informatics, University of Edinburgh, 80 South Bridge, Edinburgh, EH1 1HN, U.K. (Email