View: session overviewtalk overview
09:00  Never Trust Your Solver: Certification for SAT and QBF ABSTRACT. Many problems for formal verification and artificial intelligence rely on advanced reasoning technologies in the background, often in the form of SAT or QBF solvers. Such solvers are sophisticated and highly tuned pieces of software, often too complex to be verified themselves. Now the question arises how one can one be sure that the result of such a solver is correct, especially when its result is critical for proving the correctness of another system. If a SAT solver, a tool for deciding a propositional formula, returns satisfiable, then it also returns a model which is easy to check. If the answer is unsatisfiable, the situation is more complicated. And so it is for true and false quantified Boolean formulas (QBFs), which extend propositional logic by quantifiers over the Boolean variables. To increase the trust in a solving result, modern solvers are expected to produce certificates that can independently and efficiently be checked. In this paper, we give an overview of the state of the art on validating the results of SAT and QBF solvers based on certification.

10:00  Proving an Execution of an Algorithm Correct? ABSTRACT. Many algorithms in computer algebra and beyond produce answers. For some of these, we have formal proofs of the correctness of the algorithm, and for others it is easy to verify that the answer is correct. Other algorithms produce either an answer or a proof that no such answer exists. It may still be easy to verify that the answer is correct, but what about the ``no such answer'' case. The claim of this paper is that, at least in some cases, it is possible for the algorithm to produce ``hints'' such that a theorem prover can prove that, in this case, there is no such answer. 
10:30  VizAR: Visualization of Automated Reasoning Proofs PRESENTER: Jan Jakubuv ABSTRACT. We present a system for the visualization of proofs originating from Automated Theorem Provers for firstorder logic. The system can hide uninteresting proof parts of proofs, such as type annotations, translate firstorder terms to standard math syntax, and compactly display complex formulas. We demonstrate the system on several nontrivial automated proofs of statements from Mizar Mathematical Library translated to firstorder logic, and we provide a web interface where curious users can browse and investigate the proofs. 
11:30  Verified Correctness, Accuracy, and Convergence of a Stationary Iterative Linear Solver: Jacobi Method PRESENTER: Mohit Tekriwal ABSTRACT. Solving a sparse linear system of the form Ax=b is a common engineering task, e.g., as a step in approximating solutions of differential equations. Inverting a large matrix A is often too expensive, and instead engineers rely on iterative methods, which progressively approximate the solution x of the linear system in several iterations, where each iteration is a much less expensive (sparse) matrixvector multiplication. We present a formal proof in the Coq proof assistant of the correctness, accuracy and convergence of one prominent iterative method, the Jacobi iteration. The accuracy and convergence properties of Jacobi iteration are wellstudied, but most past analyses were performed in real arithmetic; instead, we study those properties, and formally prove our results, in floatingpoint arithmetic. We also formally prove that our results are properly reflected in a concrete implementation in the C programming language. Finally, we formally prove that the iteration will not overflow, under assumptions that we make explicit. Notably, our proofs are faithful to the details of the implementation, including C program semantics and floatingpoint arithmetic. 
12:00  Highlighting Named Entities in Input for AutoFormulation of Optimization Problems PRESENTER: Neeraj Gangwar ABSTRACT. Operations research deals with modeling and solving realworld problems as mathematical optimization problems. While solving mathematical systems is accomplished by analytical software, formulating a problem as a set of mathematical operations has been typically done manually by domain experts. Recent machine learning methods have shown promise in converting textual problem descriptions to corresponding mathematical formulations. This paper presents an approach that converts linear programming word problems into mathematical formulations. We leverage the named entities in the input and augment the input to highlight these entities. Our approach achieves the highest accuracy among all submissions to the NL4Opt Competition, securing first place in the generation track. 
12:30  Evasiveness through Binary Decision Diagrams PRESENTER: Jesús Aransay ABSTRACT. In this paper, we explore whether a data structure for representing Boolean functions (namely, Binary Decision Diagrams) can be useful to detect, in an efficient way, the acyclicity of simplicial complexes. This is approached by means of the concept of evasiveness, allowing us to study the relation with Alexander duality. Furthermore, as main result, we proved that the (depth) complexity of a kind of acyclic simplicial complexes (dismantlable complexes) can be determined by means of Reduced Ordered Binary Decision Diagrams. As the subject has shown itself error prone, we have carried out the proof by using the Isabelle proof assistant, providing a rewarding combination of informal and formal mathematics. 
14:00  Formal Specification and Verification of Attestation in Confidential Computing ABSTRACT. Despite its critical role, remote attestation in Intel Software Guard Extensions (SGX) and Trust Domain Extensions (TDX) is not only underspecified by Intel but also contains various contradictions that could potentially lead to design and implementation flaws. We take the challenge of formal specification and verification of remote attestation mechanism in Intel SGX and TDX. Our most recent work formally demonstrates attacks on Intel's claimed trusted computing base (TCB) for TDX. 
14:20  Doctoral Program Proposal Computing GCDs of Multivariate Polynomials over Algebraic Number Fields Presented with Multiple Extensions PRESENTER: Mahsa Ansari ABSTRACT. Let Q(α1, · · ·, αn) be an algebraic number field. We designed a modular gcd algorithm, MGCD, for computing the monic gcd, g, of two polynomials f1, f2 belonging to Q(α1, . . . , αn)[x1, . . . , xk]. To improve the efficiency of MGCD, we use linear algebra to find an isomorphism between Q(α1, . . . , αn) and Q(γ), where γ is a primitive element of Q(α1, . . . , αn). To prevent expression swell, this conversion is performed modulo a prime. Next, we use a sequence of evaluation points to convert the multivariate polynomials to univariate polynomials, enabling us to employ the monic Euclidean algorithm. We currently use dense interpolation to recover x2, . . . , xk in the gcd. In order to reconstruct the rational coefficients in g, we apply the Chinese remaindering(CRT) and the rational number reconstruction(RNR). We have implemented our algorithm in Maple using a recursive dense representation for polynomials. 
14:40  Towards computerassisted semantic markup of mathematical documents ABSTRACT. The language of mathematics contains many ambiguities, which make the meaning of mathematical documents more difficult to infer. We hope to make mathematical documents prepared with LaTeX less ambiguous, by producing semantic markup for the mathematical formulas they contain. We will do this using sTeX, a LaTeX macro package for semantic markup, and the accompanying Semantic Multilingual Glossary of Mathematics (SMGloM). The current approach we are investigating is turning collections of semantic macros into contextfree grammars to parse formulas and try to infer their structure. 
15:00  Physics Engines for Verification of Robotic Systems ABSTRACT. How can it be ensured that a robot will move where it is expected to move, and interact with its environment in the way it is expected? This is the fundamental question motivating and underpinning this work. Often this is answered with a simulation of a robotic system. But how would one verify the system using other techniques (such as testing or proof) to confirm the behaviour observed in simulation? This requires using the equations of the model of the robotic system and their solutions, adopted for simulation, and then ensuring that there is consistency with the equations used in testing and proof techniques. Physics engines are components of a simulator that embody, determine, or use equations describing physical properties or behaviour. They are found across many disciplines, including animated films, video games, and robotics. Physics engines today are often designed to be broad enough to cover multiple domains, rather than focusing on robotic systems alone. For instance, most physics engines favour speed over accuracy when calculating the dynamics of a robotic system. In the context of robotics, this is not ideal, as it exacerbates the reality gap that occurs when behaviour observed in simulation is not reproduced in the real world. There are currently no convenient means by which the developer of a simulation can determine or even find out the underlying equations used by the physics engine. Without this possibility or knowledge, consistency between simulation and other verification techniques cannot be guaranteed. Besides simulation, verification of a robotic system can involve testing and proof (using model checkers and theorem provers such as FDR and Isabelle). Testing and simulation alone are not enough for the verification of safetycritical or missioncritical robotic systems. With complementary proofbased verification, one can ensure that observations in testing and simulation apply for all scenarios. Use of a variety of verification techniques, however, is only effective if any observations in simulation can be expected to be consistent with the proof of any properties relating to the robot and the environment. This is only possible if one can guarantee that the simulation and the proof use the same models, and that the error due to the solution of any behavioral equations of these models used in simulation is accounted for. Ensuring consistency between simulation and proof reduces the amount of testing required in the verification of a robotic system, thereby reducing costs. Examples where proof has been considered as part of the verification of a robotic system include surgical robots and robotic ground vehicles. Consistency is defined as follows. Consistency: "A simulation and a proof of a property of a robotic system are consistent if the equations used in the mathematical model adopted in the proof are the same as those used in simulation." The following research hypothesis summarises the goal of the thesis. Research Hypothesis: "It is possible to provide techniques and tools for use of a physics engine in a simulation that can be used in the verification of robotic systems under full consistency with proof." We aim to complete the current work which aims to partially tackle the above research hypothesis by the end of July in time for submission to ICRA. In particular, our contributions here are threefold. First, we describe a simulation framework, including each of its artefacts and techniques. Second, we provide a manual implementation of the code generation steps of our framework. We show that we can achieve transparency up to highlevel functions involved in forward dynamics computations and at a very high cost. Finally, we demonstrate how our choice of simulator, Drake, and our choice of modelling language, RoboSim, can be adapted to use our framework, and the limitations of this approach with respect to consistency. In our framework, intermediary representations of behavioural equations and their solution bridge the gap between behavioural equations of components at the model level, and the animation of a robotic system by a physics engine. Physics engines currently make use of SDF to describe aspects of the model of a robotic system, however, our intermediary representations extend SDF to include OpenMath, which allows us to include information relating to behavioural equations and their solution. We look to obtain feedback on this aspect of our work at the CICM doctoral symposium. The rules describing the automatic generation from model, to intermediary representations and their solution, to code which can be used by a physics engine, is to be undertaken until January 2024. Following this we aim to submit this portion of our work to a computer science conference or journal. In parallel with this work, we aim to carry out further case studies through which properties about kinematic singularities are proven, which are also observed in simulation. We aim to publish these results in a suitable robotics journal or conference. 
15:20  Theory Morphisms in Computer Supported Education ABSTRACT. In my PhD thesis I propose to explore the capabilities of using theory morphisms to improve adaptive learning systems. Thereby I aim to adresses the problem of handling interrelations between mathematical theories in automated processes for managing education material. 
14:00  Presentation of Active Documents in ALeA PRESENTER: Abhishek Chugh ABSTRACT. The ALeA system (Adaptive Learning Assistant) offers learners highly interactive learning materials, leveraging a finegrained domain model, learner profiling, and semantically annotated learning objects, to create personalized course content. This paper focuses on ALeA’s user interface, through which learners interact with active documents. We outline the representation scheme of these documents and elucidate their features designed to enhance the learning experience. Moreover, we delve into the abstractions and complexities addressed by the clientside React (javascript) library to enable these features. 
14:30  More Interactions in ALeA – Towards New AddedValue Services based on Semantic Markup PRESENTER: Andrea Kohlhase ABSTRACT. The ALeA system (Adaptive Learning Assistant) uses a finegrained domain model, a learner model based on it, and semantically annotated learning objects to generate useradaptive and interactive course materials for pre/postparation of lectures and selfstudy. In this paper we propose new interactions and learning support services that enhance the learner experience without requiring new markup facilities – in essence enhancing the didactic capabilities of the system without further investment into marking up learning objects. 
15:00  The learning constructs of inquirybased mathematics learning represented in the log data of manipulating dynamic content PRESENTER: Masataka Kaneko ABSTRACT. In this study, we analyze computeraided inquirybased mathematics learning and illustrate how the learning constructs are represented in the learning data. A Moodle plugin associated with the dynamic geometry software CindyJS was used to record finegrained log data of learners' manipulations of the dynamic content on the web. Our previous study indicates that some characteristic quantity calculated from the log data can serve as an indicator of the occurrence of some productive failure in learners' inquiry and teacher intervention can prompt those failures. However, the relationship between the occurrence of those failures and the learning constructs created through the whole manipulation process has not been fully investigated. In this study, we examine the temporal change of the characteristic quantity across those failures and consider how the learning constructs are represented in the log data of manipulations. 
15:30  Framework for building an ELearning system using existing teaching materials ABSTRACT. This paper describes an experimental framework for creating an ELearning system. This framework is designed to be used by teachers in schools, and by utilizing HTML5 technology, can create an ELearning system on PCs without the need for a special server. The ELearning system created is a web application consisting of a single HTML file, which can be used not only on a PC, but also on tablets and smartphones. The ELearning system created from this framework is characterized by its duallayered screen structure. By placing existing educational materials and websites on the lower layer of the twotier structure and adding additional textboxes and buttons on the upper layer, it is possible to convert existing educational materials and websites into an ELearning system. In addition, various functions can be added to the system by utilizing JavaScript libraries. For example, by incorporating Algebrite, a JavaScript library for symbolic computation, it is possible to perform symbolic computation of mathematical expressions, which can then be used to automatically grade students' answers. In this paper, after outlining the structure of this framework, the JavaScript library used will be described. After that, the flow of actually constructing an ELearning system using this framework will be explained step by step. 
16:30  PRESENTER: Shotaro Suzuki ABSTRACT. The Mizar Mathematical Library (MML) is a collection of mathematical documents formalized by the Mizar system. Visualizing the interrelationships among the MML articles can illuminate their structure and connections, but the scale and intricacy pose significant challenges. In our research, we introduce a method to illustrate these MML dependencies: we sort the MML articles according to the classifications in the Encyclopedic Dictionary of Mathematics. Moreover, we are exploring the feasibility of utilizing generative AI to automate this sorting process, aiming to lessen the need for manual labor. Finally, we also discuss a new algorithm for rendering categorized dependency graphs. 
17:00  Digitising Advanced Interactions with Base Ten Blocks on a Grid ABSTRACT. Base ten blocks used together with a grid can provide a consistent environment for modelling place value as well as arithmetic operations, such as addition, subtraction, regrouping and decomposition, which is particularly beneficial for students who struggle with mathematics. However, their physical use requires extensive teacher training and almost constant teacher supervision of a student. Digital interactions with base ten blocks and a grid allow for independent work and therefore enormous scalability of math interventions. This exploratory research aims to evaluate the feasibility of this digitisation process and identify the main challenges that need to be overcome to maintain or even improve on effectiveness of base ten blocks on a grid. 
16:30  Building small worlds in mathematical texts by formal and informal means ABSTRACT. One aspect of naturalness in natural language proof texts is the limitation of objects to a cognitively manageable number or their grouping in a limited number of aggregates in each part of a proof. More precisely, we should talk about "reference markers" instead of "objects", abstracting from the ontological structure we are referring to. Here, the term "reference marker" is used in a sense that any (generalized) quantifier introduces one or two new reference markers which can be referenced in the following text. In this sense, when talking about "every group g" one new reference marker g and  if not yet introduced into the discourse  a discourse marker for the set of groups are added to the discourse, only. A common means of grouping discourse markers in formal notations of natural language proof texts are typographical means and diacritics, cf. the notations for a straight line through the point A and B, a ray starting at A and running through B, a line segment between A und B, and its length. Or consider how functions and their derivatives and antiderivatives are usually written. Another technique of grouping related objects is the use of ambiguous, particularly polysemous expressions the readings of which are related metonymically. Polysemy means an ambiguity where the different meanings of an expression are conceptually related, like "height" meaning a dimension of measure and a geographical place. A big portion of polysemous readings are based on metonymy. So, e.g., "school" could be used to refer to an institution or to a building which hosts this institution in the same text. Both meanings are ontologically different, but are connected by a "contiguous" relation (cf. Panther/Radden eds. 1999), here the place where an institution is situated. Most cases of metonymy can be explained by a small set of contiguous relations. Commonly, language users become aware of such cases of polysemy in very few contexts. In a similar metonymical fashion mathematical terms referring to results of arithmetical operations as e.g. "sum" or "product" (cf. (1)) can also refer to the expressions of the arithmetical operations or to various levels of abstraction from the expressions (e.g. by abstracting from commutative or associative transformations of the expressions), cf (2). (1) The sum of x and y is not divible by 3. (2) r is the squarefree part of the product of the numbers in M. Mathematical notation is sometimes designed to address these levels of abstraction e.g. by leaving open the exact associative structure of an expression, cf. (3) a+b+c Another source of polysemy is the implicit introduction of plural entities, i.e. entities like sets, sequences etc. comprising more than one member (see Nouwen 2015, Cramer/Schröder 2012 and Schröder in print). In a sentence like (4) a, b and c are P. the predicate P can be applied to a, b and c respectively (distributive interpretation) or to a plural entity formed by a, b and c (collective interpretation), as e.g. the set {a,b,c}. Even more interpretations get possible if further quantifications come into play. (5) For all i, a_i, b_i and c_i are P. could have a purely distributive interpretation, but also a collective interpretation for the plural entities constituted by a_i, b_i and c_i for each i, and collective interpretations for plural entities like {a_i, b_i, c_i  i} or {{a_i, b_i, c_i}  i}. In many proof texts the natural language mechanism of implicitly forming plural entities is used very effectively. In my contribution I will argue that the notational means to group reference markers and the metonymical uses of mathematical terms are essential for keeping natural language mathematical proofs readable and natural. References

17:00  Formalizing Sets, Numbers, and some "Wiedijk Theorems" in Naproche PRESENTER: Peter Koepke ABSTRACT. Freek Wiedijk's webpage "Formalizing 100 Theorems" [1] is sometimes considered a benchmark for formalizations in interactive proof systems. It also provides immediate comparisons between proof styles in different systems. In our talk we present a formalization in the Naproche Natural Proof Checker [2, 3] of sets, numbers and about 10 theorems from Wiedijk's list. The formalization is part of the Isabelle 2023 release together with a pdfprintout. Naproche formalizations aim at natural mathematical readability: texts are written in a LaTeX source format that compiles to pdf documents which read like standard mathematics. Strong automatic theorem provers are employed to achieve textbooklike proof granularities. Naproche's input language ForTheL [4] (for Formula Theory Language) is a controlled natural language based on patterns of tokens. The Naproche system parses an input text into an incomplete proof tree of firstorder statements, where leaves correspond to axiomatic assumptions, and other nodes are supposed to follow logically from premises higher up in the tree. The system reads through the proof tree and checks statements for type correctness and provability from their premises. These checks are mainly done by external ATPs like E or Vampire. In line with the standard foundations of mathematics in firstorder logic and set theory, linguistic types like "natural number" or "function" are interpreted as type guards. Sets (and classes) can be formed by abstraction terms, obeying set existence axioms. Naproche is a component of the Isabelle prover platform [5]. After downloading and installing Isabelle, Naproche is immediately available and will automatically check .ftl.tex files opened in the Isabelle editor. Isabelle/Naproche ships with a couple of example files ranging from small demos to larger mathematical developments. The present formalization is included as the example file sets_and_numbers.ftl.tex. In the formalization, set theory is developed up to the wellknown theorems of Cantor and CantorSchröderBernstein which are #63 and #25 on Wiedijk's list. The standard number systems are introduced "topdown": we postulate field axioms for the real numbers and then introduce the subsystems of rational, integer and natural numbers. Interestingly, the principle of mathematical induction (#74) follows from the supremum principle for real numbers. Using induction we prove the summation formulas for finite geometric (#66) and arithmetic series (#68), and the number of subsets of finite sets (#52). After the introduction of division and primes in the natural numbers we prove the correctness of Euclid's algorithm (#69), Bezout's theorem (#60), the irrationality of \sqrt{2} (#1) and the infinitude of primes (#11). We conclude with the denumerability of the rational numbers (#3) and the uncountability of the real continuum (#22). Overall, the formalization could be used in a seminar which teaches natural and formal proving with Naproche whilst recapitulating basic and interesting facts about sets and numbers. [1] https://www.cs.ru.nl/~freek/100/ [2] https://naproche.github.io/index.html [3] Adrian De Lon, Peter Koepke, Anton Lorenzen, Adrian Marti, Marcel Schütz, Makarius Wenzel: The Isabelle/Naproche Natural Language Proof Assistant. In: Automated Deduction – CADE 28: 28th International Conference on Automated Deduction (Proceedings), 2021, pp. 614–624. [4] Andrei Paskevich: The syntax and semantics of the ForTheL language. 2007. URL: http://nevidal.org/download/forthel.pdf [5] https://isabelle.in.tum.de/ 
17:30  Naproche Demo ABSTRACT. Naproche Demonstration 