Formally Verified Approximations of Definite Integrals

  • Assia Mahboubi
  • Guillaume MelquiondEmail author
  • Thomas Sibut-Pinote
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9807)


Finding an elementary form for an antiderivative is often a difficult task, so numerical integration has become a common tool when it comes to making sense of a definite integral. Some of the numerical integration methods can even be made rigorous: not only do they compute an approximation of the integral value but they also bound its inaccuracy. Yet numerical integration is still missing from the toolbox when performing formal proofs in analysis.

This paper presents an efficient method for automatically computing and proving bounds on some definite integrals inside the Coq formal system. Our approach is not based on traditional quadrature methods such as Newton-Cotes formulas. Instead, it relies on computing and evaluating antiderivatives of rigorous polynomial approximations, combined with an adaptive domain splitting. This work has been integrated to the CoqInterval library.


  1. 1.
    Ahmed, Z.: Ahmed’s integral: the maiden solution. Math. Spectr. 48(1), 11–12 (2015)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Boldo, S., Lelay, C., Melquiond, G.: Coquelicot: a user-friendly library of real analysis for Coq. Math. Comput. Sci. 9(1), 41–62 (2015)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Eaton, J.W., Bateman, D., Hauberg, S., Wehbring, R., Octave, G.N.U.: version 3.8.1 manual: a high-level interactive language for numerical computations (2014)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hass, J., Schlafly, R.: Double bubbles minimize. Ann. Math. 151(2), 459–515 (2000). Second SeriesMathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Helfgott, H.A.: Major arcs for Goldbach’s problem (2013).
  6. 6.
    Immler, F.: Formally verified computation of enclosures of solutions of ordinary differential equations. In: Badger, J.M., Rozier, K.Y. (eds.) NFM 2014. LNCS, vol. 8430, pp. 113–127. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Makarov, E., Spitters, B.: The picard algorithm for ordinary differential equations in Coq. In: Blazy, S., Paulin-Mohring, C., Pichardie, D. (eds.) ITP 2013. LNCS, vol. 7998, pp. 463–468. Springer, Heidelberg (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Martin-Dorel, É., Melquiond, G.: Proving tight bounds on univariate expressions with elementary functions in Coq. J. Autom. Reason. 1–31 (2015)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Mayero, M.: Formalisation et automatisation de preuves en analyses réelle et numérique. Ph.D. thesis, Université Paris VI, December 2001Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Moore, R.E., Kearfott, R.B., Cloud, M.J.: Introduction to Interval Analysis. SIAM, Philadelphia (2009)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Nedialkov, N.S.: Interval tools for ODEs and DAEs. In: Scientific Computing, Computer Arithmetic and Validated Numerics (SCAN) (2006).
  12. 12.
    O’Connor, R., Spitters, B.: A computer verified, monadic, functional implementation of the integral. Theor. Comput. Sci. 411(37), 3386–3402 (2010)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Rump, S.M.: Verification methods: Rigorous results using floating-point arithmetic. Acta Numerica 19, 287–449 (2010). Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tucker, W.: Validated Numerics: A Short Introduction to Rigorous Computations. Princeton University Press, Princeton (2011)zbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  • Assia Mahboubi
    • 1
  • Guillaume Melquiond
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Thomas Sibut-Pinote
    • 1
  1. 1.InriaPalaiseauFrance
  2. 2.LRI, CNRS UMR 8623Université Paris-SudOrsayFrance

Personalised recommendations