Publications (BibTeX)

@inproceedings{BP2011frocos,
  author = {François Bobot and Andrei Paskevich},
  title = {Expressing Polymorphic Types in a Many-Sorted Language},
  editor = {Tinelli, Cesare and Sofronie-Stokkermans, Viorica},
  booktitle = {FroCoS 2011, 8th International Symposium on Frontiers of Combining Systems},
  series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science},
  volume = {6989},
  year = {2011},
  pages = {87--102},
  month = oct,
  publisher = {Springer},
  address = {Saarbrücken, Germany},
  index = {969},
  pdf = {papers/frocos-11.pdf},
  abstract = {
    In this paper, we study translation from a first-order logic with polymorphic
    types à la ML (of which we give a formal description) to a many-sorted or
    one-sorted logic as accepted by mainstream automated theorem provers.
    We consider a three-stage scheme where the last stage eliminates polymorphic
    types while adding the necessary "annotations" to preserve soundness, and the
    first two stages serve to protect certain terms so that they can keep their
    original unannotated form. This protection allows us to make use of provers'
    built-in theories and operations.
    We present two existing translation procedures as sound and complete instances
    of this generic scheme. Our formulation generalizes over the previous ones by
    allowing us to protect terms of arbitrary monomorphic types. In particular,
    we can benefit from the built-in theory of arrays in SMT solvers such as
    Z3, CVC3, and Yices.
    The proposed methods are implemented in the Why3 tool and we compare their
    performance in combination with several automated provers.
  }
}
@misc{BP2011report,
  author = {François Bobot and Andrei Paskevich},
  title = {Expressing Polymorphic Types in a Many-Sorted Language},
  note = {Extended report},
  url = {http://hal.inria.fr/inria-00591414/en/},
  month = jul,
  year = 2011,
  index = {970},
  pdf = {papers/polyfol-11.pdf},
  abstract = {
    In this paper, we study translation from a first-order logic with polymorphic
    types à la ML (of which we give a formal description) to a many-sorted or
    one-sorted logic as accepted by mainstream automated theorem provers.
    We consider a three-stage scheme where the last stage eliminates polymorphic
    types while adding the necessary "annotations" to preserve soundness, and the
    first two stages serve to protect certain terms so that they can keep their
    original unannotated form. This protection allows us to make use of provers'
    built-in theories and operations.
    We present two existing translation procedures as sound and complete instances
    of this generic scheme. Our formulation generalizes over the previous ones by
    allowing us to protect terms of arbitrary monomorphic types. In particular,
    we can benefit from the built-in theory of arrays in SMT solvers such as
    Z3, CVC3, and Yices.
    The proposed methods are implemented in the Why3 tool and we compare their
    performance in combination with several automated provers.
    }
}
@inproceedings{BFMP11boogie,
  author = {François Bobot and Jean-Christophe Filliâtre and Claude Marché and Andrei Paskevich},
  title = {{Why3}: Shepherd Your Herd of Provers},
  booktitle = {Boogie 2011, First International Workshop on Intermediate Verification Languages},
  year = 2011,
  pages = {53--64},
  address = {Wrocław, Poland},
  month = aug,
  index = {971},
  pdf = {papers/boogie-11.pdf},
  abstract = {
    Why3 is the next generation of the Why software verification
    platform. Why3 clearly separates the purely logical specification part
    from generation of verification conditions for programs. This article
    focuses on the former part. Why3 comes with a new enhanced language
    of logical specification. It features a rich library of proof task
    transformations that can be chained to produce a suitable input for
    a large set of theorem provers, including SMT solvers, TPTP provers,
    as well as interactive proof assistants.
  }
}
@inproceedings{CCFPPU10PEPM,
  author = {{\'E}velyne Contejean and Pierre Courtieu and Julien Forest
                and Andrei Paskevich and Olivier Pons and Xavier Urbain},
  title = {{A3PAT}, an approach for certified automated termination proofs},
  booktitle = {PEPM'10, Proceedings of the 2010 ACM SIGPLAN Workshop on
                Partial Evaluation and Program Manipulation},
  publisher = {ACM},
  address = {Madrid, Spain},
  month = jan,
  year = {2010},
  pages = {63--72},
  doi = {http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1706356.1706370},
  index = {972},
  pdf = {papers/pepm-10.pdf},
  abstract = {
        Software engineering, automated reasoning, rule-based programming
        or specifications often use rewriting systems for which termination,
        among other properties, may have to be ensured.This paper presents
        the approach developed in Project A3PAT to discover and moreover
        certify, with full automation, termination proofs for term rewriting
        systems.

        It consists of two developments: the Coccinelle library formalises
        numerous rewriting techniques and termination criteria for the Coq
        proof assistant; the CiME3 rewriting tool translates termination
        proofs (discovered by itself or other tools) into traces that are
        certified by Coq assisted by Coccinelle.

        The abstraction level of our formalisation allowed us to weaken
        premises of some theorems known in the literature, thus yielding
        new termination criteria, such as an extension of the powerful
        subterm criterion (for which we propose the first full Coq
        formalisation). Techniques employed in CiME3 also improve on
        previous works on formalisation and analysis of dependency graphs.
    }
}
@inproceedings{VLPA08MKM,
  author = {Konstantin Verchinine and Alexander Lyaletski
                    and Andrei Paskevich and Anatoly Anisimov},
  title = {On correctness of mathematical texts from
                    a logical and practical point of view},
  booktitle = {Intelligent Computer Mathematics, AISC/Calculemus/MKM 2008},
  editor = {Serge Autexier and John Campbell and Julio Rubio
                    and Volker Sorge and Masakazu Suzuki and Freek Wiedijk},
  series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address = {Birmingham, United Kingdom},
  month = jul,
  year = 2008,
  volume = 5144,
  pages = {583--598},
  index = {973},
  pdf = {papers/mkm-08.pdf},
  abstract = {
        Formalizing mathematical argument is a fascinating activity
        in itself and (we hope!) also bears important practical
        applications. While traditional proof theory investigates
        deducibility of an individual statement from a collection
        of premises, a mathematical proof, with its structure and
        continuity, can hardly be presented as a single sequent or
        a set of logical formulas. What is called ``mathematical text'',
        as used in mathematical practice through the ages, seems to be
        more appropriate. However, no commonly adopted formal notion
        of mathematical text has emerged so far.

        In this paper, we propose a formalism which aims to reflect
        natural (human) style and structure of mathematical argument,
        yet to be appropriate for automated processing: principally,
        verification of its correctness (we consciously use the word
        rather than ``soundness'' or ``validity'').

        We consider mathematical texts that are formalized in
        the ForTheL language (brief description of which is also given)
        and we formulate a point of view on what a correct mathematical
        text might be. Logical notion of correctness is formalized with
        the help of a calculus. Practically, these ideas, methods and
        algorithms are implemented in a proof assistant called SAD.
        We give a short description of SAD and a series of examples
        showing what can be done with it.
    }
}
@article{P08JAR,
  author = {Andrei Paskevich},
  title = {Connection Tableaux with Lazy Paramodulation},
  journal = {Journal of Automated Reasoning},
  publisher = {Springer},
  year = 2008,
  volume = 40,
  number = {2--3},
  pages = {179--194},
  index = {974},
  pdf = {papers/jar-08.pdf},
  abstract = {
        It is well known that the connection refinement of clause
        tableaux with paramodulation is incomplete (even with weak
        connections). In this paper, we present a new connection
        tableau calculus for logic with equality. This calculus
        is based on a lazy form of paramodulation where parts of
        the unification step become auxiliary subgoals in a tableau
        and may be subjected to subsequent paramodulations.
        Our calculus uses ordering constraints and a certain form
        of the basicness restriction.
    }
}
@phdthesis{P07THES,
  author = {Andriy Paskevych},
  title = {Méthodes de formalisation des connaissances
                    et des raisonnements mathématiques:
                    aspects appliqués et théoriques},
  school = {Université Paris 12},
  year = 2007,
  pages = {128},
  note = {In French},
  index = {975},
  pdf = {papers/thesis-07.fr.pdf},
  abstract = {
        We study the means of presentation of mathematical knowledge
        and reasoning schemes. Our research aims at an automated system
        for verification of formalized mathematical texts.

        In this system, a text to verify is written in a formal language
        which is close to the natural language and style of mathematical
        publications. Our intention is to exploit the hint which are
        given to us by the «human» form of the problem: definitions,
        proof schemes, nouns denoting classes of objects, etc.
        We describe such a language, called ForTheL.

        Verification consists in showing that the text is «sensible»
        and «grounded», that functions and relations are applied within
        the domain, according to the definitions, and assertions follow
        from their respective premises. A formal definition of a correct
        text relies on a sound sequent calculus and on the notion of local
        validity (local with respect to some occurrence inside a formula).

        Proof search is carried out on two levels. The lower level is
        an automated theorem prover based on a combinatorial procedure.
        We introduce a variant of connection tableaux which is sound and
        complete in the first-order logic with equality.

        The higher level is a «reasoner» which employs natural proving
        techniques in order to filter, simplify, decompose a proof task
        before passing it to the prover. The algorithms of the reasoner
        are based on transformations that preserve the locally valid
        propositions.

        The proposed methods are implemented in the proof assistant SAD.
    }
}
@inproceedings{PVLA07MKM,
  author = {Andrei Paskevich and Konstantin Verchinine
                    and Alexander Lyaletski and Anatoly Anisimov},
  title = {Reasoning inside a formula and ontological correctness
                    of a formal mathematical text},
  booktitle = {Calculemus/MKM 2007 --- Work in Progress},
  editor = {Manuel Kauers and Manfred Kerber and Robert Miner
                    and Wolfgang Windsteiger},
  series = {RISC-Linz Report Series, University of Linz, Austria},
  address = {Hagenberg, Austria},
  month = jun,
  year = 2007,
  number = {07-06},
  pages = {77--91},
  index = {976},
  pdf = {papers/mkm-07.pdf},
  abstract = {
        Dealing with a formal mathematical text (which we regard
        as a structured collection of hypotheses and conclusions),
        we often want to perform various analysis and transformation
        tasks on the initial formulas, without preliminary normalization.
        One particular example is checking for ``ontological correctness'',
        namely, that every occurrence of a non-logical symbol stems
        from some definition of that symbol in the foregoing text.
        Generally, we wish to test whether some known fact (axiom,
        definition, lemma) is ``applicable'' at a given position
        inside a statement, and to actually apply it (when needed)
        in a logically sound way.

        In this paper, we introduce the notion of a locally valid
        statement, a statement that can be considered true at
        a given position inside a first-order formula. We justify
        the reasoning about ``innards'' of a formula; in particular,
        we show that a locally valid equivalence is a sufficient
        condition for an equivalent transformation of a subformula.
        Using the notion of local validity, we give a formal definition
        of ontological correctness for a text written in a special
        formal language called ForTheL.
    }
}
@inproceedings{VLP07CADE,
  author = {Konstantin Verchinine and Alexander Lyaletski
                    and Andrei Paskevich},
  title = {{System for Automated Deduction (SAD): a tool
                    for proof verification}},
  booktitle = {Automated Deduction, 21st International Conference, CADE-21},
  editor = {Frank Pfenning},
  series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address = {Bremen, Germany},
  month = jul,
  year = 2007,
  volume = 4603,
  pages = {398--403},
  index = {977},
  pdf = {papers/cade-07.pdf},
  abstract = {
        In this paper, a proof assistant, called SAD, is presented.
        SAD deals with mathematical texts that are formalized in
        the ForTheL language (brief description of which is also
        given) and checks their correctness. We give a short
        description of SAD and a series of examples that show
        what can be done with it. Note that abstract notion of
        correctness on which the implementation is based, can be
        formalized with the help of a calculus (not presented here).
    }
}
@inproceedings{P06IJCAR,
  author = {Andrei Paskevich},
  title = {Connection Tableaux with Lazy Paramodulation},
  booktitle = {Automated Reasoning, 3rd International
                        Joint Conference, IJCAR 2006},
  editor = {Uli Furbach and Natarajan Shankar},
  series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address = {Seattle WA, USA},
  month = aug,
  year = 2006,
  volume = 4130,
  pages = {112--124},
  index = {978},
  pdf = {papers/ijcar-06.pdf},
  abstract = {
        It is well-known that the connection refinement of clause
        tableaux with paramodulation is incomplete (even with weak
        connections). In this paper, we present a new connection
        tableau calculus for logic with equality. This calculus
        is based on a lazy form of paramodulation where parts of
        the unification step become auxiliary subgoals in a tableau
        and may be subjected to subsequent paramodulations.
        Our calculus uses ordering constraints and a certain form
        of the basicness restriction.
    }
}
@article{LPV06JAL,
  author = {Alexander Lyaletski and Andrey Paskevich
                    and Konstantin Verchinine},
  title = {{SAD} as a mathematical assistant --- how
                    should we go from here to there?},
  journal = {Journal of Applied Logic},
  booktitle = {Towards Computer Aided Mathematics},
  editor = {Christoph Benzm\"uller},
  publisher = {Elsevier},
  year = 2006,
  volume = 4,
  number = 4,
  pages = {560--591},
  index = {980},
  ps = {papers/jal-06.ps.gz},
  abstract = {
        The System for Automated Deduction (SAD) is developed
        in the framework of the Evidence Algorithm research project
        and is intended for automated processing of mathematical texts.
        The SAD system works on three levels of reasoning:
        (a) the level of text presentation where proofs are written
        in a formal natural-like language for subsequent verification;
        (b) the level of foreground reasoning where a particular
        theorem proving problem is simplified and decomposed;
        (c) the level of background deduction where exhaustive
        combinatorial inference search in classical first-order
        logic is applied to prove end subgoals. We present an overview
        of SAD describing the ideas behind the project, the system's
        design, and the process of problem formalization in the fashion
        of SAD. We show that the choice of classical first-order logic
        as the background logic of SAD is not too restrictive.
        For example, we can handle binders like $\mathit{\Sigma}$
        or $\mathit{lim}$ without resort to second order or to
        a full-powered set theory. We illustrate our approach with
        a series of examples, in particular, with the classical
        problem $\sqrt{2} \not\in \mathbf{Q}$.
    }
}
@phdthesis{P05THES,
  author = {Andriy Paskevych},
  title = {Methods of formalization of mathematical knowledge
                and reasoning: theoretical and practical aspects},
  school = {Kiev National Taras Shevchenko University},
  year = 2005,
  note = {In Ukrainian},
  pages = {140},
  index = {981},
  pdf = {papers/thesis-05.ua.pdf}
}
@inproceedings{LPV04MKM,
  author = {Alexander Lyaletski and Konstantin Verchinine
                    and Andrey Paskevich},
  title = {Theorem Proving and Proof Verification in the System {SAD}},
  booktitle = {Mathematical Knowledge Management,
                    3rd International Conference, MKM 2004},
  editor = {Andrea Asperti and Grzegorz Bancerek and Andrzej Trybulec},
  series = {Lecture Notes in Computer Science},
  publisher = {Springer},
  address = {Bialowieza, Poland},
  month = sep,
  year = 2004,
  volume = 3119,
  pages = {236--250},
  index = {982},
  ps = {papers/mkm-04.ps.gz},
  abstract = {
        In this paper, the current state of the System for Automated
        Deduction, SAD, is described briefly. The system may be
        considered as the modern vision of the Evidence Algorithm
        programme advanced by Academician V.~Glushkov in early 1970s.
        V.~Glushkov proposed to make investigation simultaneously
        into formalized languages for presenting mathematical texts
        in the form most appropriate for a user, formalization and
        evolutionary development of computer-made proof step,
        information environment having an influence on the evidence
        of a proof step, and man-assisted search for a proof.
        In this connection, SAD supports a number of formal languages
        for representing and processing mathematical knowledge along
        with the formal language ForTheL as their top representative,
        uses a sequent formalism developed for constructing an efficient
        technique of proof search within the signature of an initial
        theory, and gives a new way to organize the information
        environment for sharing mathematical knowledge among various
        computer services. The system SAD can be used to solve large
        variety of theorem proving problems including: establishing
        of the deducibility of sequents in first-order classical logic,
        theorem proving in ForTheL-environment, verifying correctness
        of self-contained ForTheL-texts, solving problems taken from
        the online library TPTP. A number of examples is given for
        illustrating the mathematical knowledge processing implemented
        in SAD.
    }
}
@inproceedings{LDPV04ISTA,
  author = {Alexander V. Lyaletski and Anatoly E. Doroshenko
                    and Andrey Paskevich and Konstantin Verchinine},
  title = {Evidential Paradigm and Intelligent
                    Mathematical Text Processing},
  booktitle = {Information Systems Technology and its Applications,
                    3rd International Conference, ISTA 2004},
  editor = {Anatoly E. Doroshenko and Terry A. Halpin
                    and Stephen W. Liddle and Heinrich C. Mayr},
  series = {Lecture Notes in Informatics},
  publisher = {GI},
  address = {Salt Lake City UT, USA},
  month = jul,
  year = 2004,
  volume = 48,
  pages = {205--211},
  index = {983},
  pdf = {papers/ista-04.pdf},
  abstract = {
        This paper presents the evidential paradigm
        of computer-supported mathematical assistance in ``doing''
        mathematics and in reasoning activity. At present, the evidential
        paradigm is implemented in the form of System for Automated
        Deduction (SAD). The system is based on the methods of automated
        theorem proving and is intended for intelligent mathematical text
        processing. It proves mathematical theorems, verifies validity of
        self-contained mathematical texts and can be used for inference
        search in first-order sequent-based logic as well. For human-like
        representation of mathematical knowledge, SAD exploits an original
        formal language close to natural languages of scientific publications.
        Since the problem of automated text verification is of great
        importance for industrial applications (checking specifications,
        proving safety properties of network protocols, etc), the paper
        illustrates some principles and peculiarities of the evidential
        paradigm by means of exemplifying the verification of a part of
        a non-trivial mathematical text.
    }
}
@inproceedings{LPV03ITCLS,
  author = {Alexander Lyaletski and Konstantin Verchinine
                    and Andrey Paskevich},
  title = {On Verification Tools Implemented in the {System}
                    for {Automated} {Deduction}},
  booktitle = {Implementation Technology for Computational
                    Logic Systems, 2nd CoLogNet Workshop, ITCLS 2003},
  address = {Pisa, Italy},
  month = sep,
  year = 2003,
  pages = {3--14},
  index = {984},
  ps = {papers/itcls-03.ps.gz},
  abstract = {
        Among the tasks of the Evidence Algorithm programme,
        the verification of formalized mathematical texts is
        of great significance. Our investigations in this domain
        were brought to practice in the last version of the System
        for Automated Deduction (SAD). The system exploits a formal
        language to represent mathematical knowledge in a ``natural''
        form and a sequential first-order formalism to prove statements
        in the frame of a self-contained mathematical text. In the paper,
        we give an overview of the architecture of SAD and its verification
        tools. In order to demonstrate the work of SAD, a sample verification
        session is examined.
    }
}
@article{LPV03II,
  author = {Konstantin Verchinine and Alexander Lyaletski
                and Andrey Paskevich},
  title = {Applying the {System} for {Automated} {Deduction}
                to mathematical text verification},
  journal = {International Journal ``Iskustvennyj Intellekt''},
  year = 2003,
  volume = 3,
  pages = {57--69},
  note = {In Russian},
  index = {986},
  pdf = {papers/ii-03.ru.pdf},
  abstract = {
        The paper is devoted to an approach to mathematical text
        processing in the style of Evidence Algorithm programme
        and describes the verification procedure implemented in
        the System for Automated Deduction (SAD). The Evidence
        Algorithm programme are aimed at construction of software
        systems for computer-aided mathematical activity, in particular,
        for automated theorem proving. The system SAD extracts and
        accumulates formalized mathematical knowledge and uses it
        to prove statements in the frame of a self-contained
        mathematical text. By now, the system SAD exploits a formal
        language for presenting mathematical texts and a sequent
        formalism that defines a notion of computer-made proof step.
        A mathematical text written is that language is translated
        into a structured sequence of first-order formulas which
        is verified then by means of a complete and sound sequent
        calculus. This verification scheme of SAD is explained by
        an example text from formal arithmetic.
    }
}
@article{AFKLPV03MMS,
  author = {Z. Aselderov and K. Verchinine and A. Lyaletski and
                A. Paskevich and V. Klimenko and {\mbox{Yu}}. Fishman},
  title = {Deductive, inductive, and analytic methods of presentation
                and processing of computer knowledge in the intellectual
                    systems (1. {Deductive} methods and tools)},
  journal = {``Matematychni mashyny i systemy''},
  year = 2003,
  volume = {\mbox{(3,4)}},
  pages = {51--74},
  note = {In Ukrainian},
  index = {987}
}
@article{P03VKU,
  author = {Andrey Paskevich},
  title = {A notion of local truth and its applications
                    in automated theorem proving},
  journal = {Bulletin of the University of Kiev
                    (physics and mathematics series)},
  year = 2003,
  volume = 1,
  pages = {199--203},
  note = {In Ukrainian},
  index = {988},
  ps = {papers/vku-03.ua.ps.gz},
  abstract = {
        We investigate when a given statement can be considered true
        in a given position inside a formula. We show that we can
        consistently reason about interiors of a formula and argue
        that proposed methods can facilitate processing of
        a formalized mathematical text.
    }
}
@article{DLMPV02PUI,
  author = {Konstantin Verchinine and Anatoli Degtyarev
                    and Marina Morokhovets and Alexander Lyaletski
                    and Andrey Paskevich},
  title = {{Evidence} {Algorithm} and processing of formalized
                    mathematical texts},
  journal = {International Journal ``Problemy upravleniya i informatiki''},
  year = 2002,
  volume = 5,
  pages = {80--95},
  note = {In Russian},
  index = {989}
}
@inproceedings{ADLPPV02WIL,
  author = {Zainutdin Aselderov and Konstantin Verchinine
                    and Anatoli Degtyarev and Alexander Lyaletski
                    and Andrey Paskevich and Alexandre Pavlov},
  title = {Linguistic Tools and Deductive Technique of the
                    {System} for {Automated} {Deduction}},
  booktitle = {Implementation of Logics, 3rd International
                    Workshop, WIL 2002},
  address = {Tbilisi, Georgia},
  month = oct,
  year = 2002,
  pages = {21--24},
  index = {991},
  ps = {papers/wil-02.ps.gz},
  abstract = {
        This paper is devoted to a brief description of some
        peculiarities and of the first software implementation
        of the System for Automated Deduction, SAD. Architecture
        of SAD corresponds well to a modern vision of the Evidence
        Algorithm that was conceived by V. Glushkov as a programme
        for constructing open systems for automated theorem proving
        that are intended for computer-aided ``doing'' mathematics:
        i.e. for extracting and accumulating mathematical computer
        knowledge and for using it in a regular and efficient manner
        to prove a given statement that is always considered as a part
        of a self-contained mathematical text. In addition, the main
        principles of SAD reflect the current understanding of
        the problem of man-assisted processing of mathematical
        computer knowledge.
    }
}
@inproceedings{DLPV02IIS,
  author = {Alexander Lyaletski and Konstantin Verchinine
                    and Anatoli Degtyarev and Andrey Paskevich},
  title = {{System} for {Automated} {Deduction} ({SAD}):
                    Linguistic and Deductive Peculiarities},
  booktitle = {Intelligent Information Systems, 11th International
                    Symposium, IIS 2002},
  editor = {M. A. Klopotek and S. T. Wierzchon and M. Michalewicz},
  series = {Advances in Soft Computing},
  publisher = {Physica-Verlag},
  address = {Sopot, Poland},
  month = jun,
  year = 2002,
  pages = {413--422},
  index = {992},
  ps = {papers/iis-02.ps.gz},
  abstract = {
        In this paper a state-of-the-art of a system for automated
        deduction called SAD is described. An architecture of SAD
        corresponds well to a modern vision of the Evidence Algorithm
        programme initiated by Academician V.~Glushkov. The system
        is intended for accumulating mathematical knowledge and using
        it in a regular and efficient manner for processing
        a self-contained mathematical text in order to prove
        a given statement that always is considered as a part
        of the text. Two peculiarities are inherent in SAD:
        (a) mathematical texts under consideration are formalized
        with the help of a specific formal language, which is close
        to a natural language used in mathematical publications;
        (b) proof search is based on a specific sequent-type calculus,
        which gives a possibility to formalize ``natural reasoning style''.
        The language may be used as a tool to write and verify mathematical
        papers, theorems, and formal specifications, to perform model
        checking, and so on. The calculus is oriented to constructing
        some natural proof search methods such as definition and
        auxiliary proposition applications.
    }
}
@article{ADLPV02II,
  author = {Zainutdin Aselderov and Konstantin Verchinine
                    and Anatoli Degtyarev and Alexander Lyaletski
                    and Andrey Paskevich},
  title = {Peculiarities of mathematical text processing in
                    the {System} for {Automated} {Deduction} ({SAD})},
  journal = {International Journal ``Iskustvennyj Intellekt''},
  year = 2002,
  volume = 4,
  pages = {163--171},
  note = {In Russian},
  index = {994},
  pdf = {papers/ii-02.ru.pdf},
  abstract = {
        The goal of a research programme Evidence Algorithm is
        a development of an open system of automated proving that
        is able to accumulate mathematical knowledge and to prove
        theorems in a context of a self-contained mathematical text.
        By now, the first version of such a system called a System
        for Automated Deduction, SAD, is implemented in software.
        The system SAD possesses the following main features:
        mathematical texts are formalized using a specific formal
        language that is close to a natural language of mathematical
        publications; a proof search is based on special sequent-type
        calculi formalizing natural reasoning style, such as application
        of definitions and auxiliary propositions. These calculi also
        admit a separation of equality handling from deduction that
        gives an opportunity to integrate logical reasoning with
        symbolic calculation.
    }
}
@inproceedings{LP01STRAT,
  author = {Alexander Lyaletski and Andrey Paskevich},
  title = {Goal-driven inference search in classical propositional logic},
  booktitle = {Proc. International Workshop {STRATEGIES'2001}},
  address = {Siena, Italy},
  month = jun,
  year = 2001,
  pages = {65--74},
  index = {995},
  ps = {papers/strat-01.ps.gz},
  abstract = {
        Two goal-driven strategies for inference search in propositional
        logic are presented in the form of special sequent calculi.
        Some results on their soundness and completeness are given,
        and comparison of these calculi is made. It is shown that
        no one of them is preferable to another in the sense of
        constructing minimal inferences.
    }
}
@article{LP01VKU,
  author = {Alexander Lyaletski and Andrey Paskevich},
  title = {On some strategies of logical inference search
                    that are driven by goals},
  journal = {Bulletin of the University of Kiev
                    (physics and mathematics series)},
  year = 2001,
  volume = 2,
  pages = {277--285},
  note = {In Ukrainian},
  index = {996},
  ps = {papers/vku-01.ua.ps.gz},
  abstract = {
        Two strategies for inference search in propositional logic
        are presented in the form of special sequential calculi.
        Some results on their soundness and completeness are given,
        and comparison of the calculi is made. It is shown that
        no one of them can be preferred to another in the sense
        of constructing minimal inferences.
    }
}
@article{PV00ITA,
  author = {Konstantin Vershinin and Andrey Paskevich},
  title = {{ForTheL} --- the language of formal theories},
  journal = {International Journal of Information
                    Theories and Applications},
  year = 2000,
  volume = 7,
  number = 3,
  pages = {120--126},
  index = {998},
  ps = {papers/ita-00.ps.gz},
  abstract = {
        The paper describes the language ForTheL (FORmal THEory
        Language) aimed at representation of formal theories ---
        in strict mathematical sense of the term. Its syntax is
        strictly formalised in the terms of BNF and its semantics
        can be precisely defined with the help of syntactical
        transformation that maps ForTheL-phrases to the formulae
        of first-order logic with equality. At the same time ForTheL
        is intended to be close to the natural language of mathematical
        texts, it formalises and uses expressive means of the human
        language.
    }
}
@article{P99VKU,
  author = {Andrey Paskevich},
  title = {Peculiarities of the implementation of a high-level
                    language for processing of mathematical texts},
  journal = {Bulletin of the University of Kiev
                    (physics and mathematics series)},
  year = 1999,
  volume = 2,
  pages = {284--288},
  note = {In Ukrainian},
  index = {999},
  ps = {papers/vku-99.ua.ps.gz},
  abstract = {
        New practical implementation of TL language and its features
        in comparison with the version used in SAD are considered.
        Description of the English TL version that was software
        implemented for the first time is given also.
    }
}

to main page Last update: 30 Aug 2008