Journal of Automated Reasoning

, Volume 19, Issue 3, pp 319–346 | Cite as

Abstract Proof Checking: An Example Motivated by an Incompleteness Theorem

  • Alan Bundy
  • Fausto Giunchiglia
  • Adolfo Villafiorita
  • Toby Walsh


We demonstrate the use of abstraction in aiding the construction of aninteresting and difficult example in a proof-checking system. Thisexperiment demonstrates that abstraction can make proofs easier tocomprehend and to verify mechanically. To support such proof checking, wehave developed a formal theory of abstraction and added facilities for usingabstraction to the GETFOL proof-checking system.

abstraction proof checking incompleteness theorems 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Armando, A. and Giunchiglia, E.: Embedding complex decision procedures inside an interactive theorem prover, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 8(3–4) (1993), 475–502.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boyer, R. S. and Moore, J S.: A Computational Logic(ACM monograph series), Academic Press, 1979.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Giunchiglia, E., Armando, A. and Pecchiari, P.: Structured proof procedures, Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 15(1), 1995.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Giunchiglia, F.: TheGETFOL Manual–GETFOL version 2, Technical Report 94-0010, DIST–University of Genova, Genoa, Italy, 1994.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Gödel, Kurt: Some metamathematical results on completeness and consistency (1930b), in Kurt Gödel: Collected Works, Oxford University Press, 1986.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Giunchiglia, F. and Walsh, T.: Theorem proving with definitions, in Proc. 7th Conference of the Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and Simulation of Behaviour, 1989, pp. 175–183. Also IRST-Technical Report 8901-03 and DAI Research Paper No 429, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Giunchiglia, F. and Walsh, T.: Using abstraction, in Proc. 8th Conference of the Society for the Study of Artificial Intelligence and Simulation of Behaviour, Leeds, UK, 1991. Also IRST-Technical Report 9010-08 and DAI Research Paper 515, University of Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Giunchiglia, F. and Walsh, T.: A theory of abstraction, Artificial Intelligence 57(2–3) (1992), 323–390. Also IRST-Technical Report 9001-14, IRST, Trento, Italy.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Giunchiglia, F. and Walsh, T.: Tree subsumption: Reasoning with outlines, in Proc. 10th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence ECAI-92, Vienna, Austria, 1992, pp. 77–81. Also IRST-Technical Report 9205-01, IRST, Trento, Italy.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Kleene, S. C.: Introduction to Metamathematics, North Holland, 1952.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Knoblock, C. A.: Automatically generating abstractions for planning, Artificial Intelligence 68 (1994), 243–302.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Korf, R. E.: Planning as search: A quantitative approach. Artificial Intelligence 33(1987), 65–88.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    McCune, W. W.: Otter 2.0 users guide, Technical Report ANL-90/9, Mathematics and Computer Science Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois, 1990.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Plaisted, D. A.: Theorem proving with abstraction, Artificial Intelligence 16(1981), 47–108.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Prawitz, D.: Natural Deduction–A Proof Theoretical Study, Almquist and Wiksell, Stockholm, 1965.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Quaife, A.: Automated proofs of Löb’s theorem and Gödel’s two incompleteness theorems, J. Automated Reasoning 4(1988), 219–231.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    N. Shankar. Proof Checking Metamathematics. Ph.D. thesis, University of Texas at Austin, 1986.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Smorynski, C.: The incompleteness theorems, in Jon Barwise (ed.), Handbook of Mathematical Logic, North Holland, 1977, pp. 821–865.Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sebastiani, R., Villafiorita, A. and Giunchiglia, F.: Proving theorems by using abstraction interactively, in Proc. 2nd International Round-Table on Abstract Intelligent Agents, Rome, Italy, to appear, 1994. Also IRST-Technical Report 9403-17, IRST, Trento, Italy.Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Villafiorita, A. and Sebastiani, R.: Proof planning by abstraction, in Proc. ECAI-94, Workshop: From Theorem Provers to Mathematical Assistants: Issues and Possible Solutions, 1994, pp. 15–24. MRG-DIST Technical Report 94-0025, DIST, University of Genova, Genova, Italy.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    R. W. Weyhrauch. Prolegomena to a theory of mechanized formal reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 13(1) (1980), 133–176.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Whitehead, A. N. and Russell, B.: Principia Mathematica, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, England, 1925.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alan Bundy
    • 1
  • Fausto Giunchiglia
    • 2
    • 3
  • Adolfo Villafiorita
    • 4
    • 5
  • Toby Walsh
    • 2
    • 5
  1. 1.Mathematical Reasoning Group, Dept. of AiUniversity of EdinburghU.K
  2. 2.Istituto Ricerca Scientifica e TecnologicaItaly (irst)
  3. 3.Disa, University of TrentoItaly
  4. 4.Istituto di InformaticaUniversity of AnconaItaly
  5. 5.Mechanized Reasoning Group, DistUniversity of GenoaItaly

Personalised recommendations