Abstract:Real-life conjectures do not come with instructions saying whether they they should be proven or, instead, refuted. Yet, as we now know, in either case the final argument produced had better be not just convincing but actually verifiable in as much detail as our need for eliminating risk might require. For those who do not happen to have direct access to the realm of mathematical truths, the modern field of formalized mathematics has quite a few lessons to contribute, and one might pay heed to what it has to say, for instance, about: the importance of employing proof strategies; the fine control of automation in unraveling the structure of a certain proof object; reasoning forward from the givens and backward from the goals, in developing proof scripts; knowing when and how definitions and identities apply in a helpful way, and when they do not apply; seeing proofs [and refutations] as dynamical objects, not reflected by the static derivation trees that Proof Theory wants them to be. I believe that the great challenge for teachers and learners resides currently less on the availability of suitable generic tools than in combining them wisely in view of their preferred education paradigms and introducing them in a way that best fits their specific aims, possibly with the help of intelligent online interactive tutoring systems. As a proof of concept, a computerized proof assistant that makes use of several successful tools already freely available on the market and that takes into account some of the above findings about teaching and learning Logic is hereby introduced. To fully account for our informed intuitions on the subject it would seem that a little bit extra technology would still be inviting, but no major breakthrough is really needed: We are talking about tools that are already within our reach to develop, as the fruits of collaborative effort.

Formal Reasoning Using an Iterative Approach with an Integrated Web IDE

F-IDEs with Features and VCs Designed to Assist Human Reasoning When Verification Fails

Automated Technology for Verification and Analysis

When Do Program-of-Thought Works for Reasoning?

A Practical Approach to Formal Methods: An Eclipse Integrated Development Environment (IDE) for Security Protocols

Reasoning Theories: Towards an Architecture for Open Mechanized Reasoning Systems

VEL: A Formally Verified Reasoner for OWL2 EL Profile

Automating Verification of Event-B Models

Reasoning Theories

Calculational Proofs in ACL2s

The Imandra Automated Reasoning System (system description)

Automating the Generation of High School Geometry Proofs using Prolog in an Educational Context

Deductive Verification of Chain-of-Thought Reasoning

Proof of Thought : Neurosymbolic Program Synthesis allows Robust and Interpretable Reasoning

Formalization and Verification of Reconfigurable Discrete-event System Using Model Driven Engineering and Isabelle/HOL

When Do Program-of-Thoughts Work for Reasoning?

More Programming Than Programming: Teaching Formal Methods in a Software Engineering Programme

Fail better: What formalized math can teach us about learning

A Formal Approach for the Development of Reactive Systems

Machine-Checked Proofs For Realizability Checking Algorithms