Presenting Proofs in a Human-Oriented Way

Horacek, Helmut

doi:10.1007/3-540-48660-7_10

Cited by 14 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 12 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Based on principles of rationality, they have elaborated a number of aspects, including ideal cooperation and linguistic action (Allwood, 1976), various speech acts (Cohen & Levesque, 1990), shared plans (Grosz & Kraus, 1996, 1999, discourse structure (Lochbaum, 1994), response planning (Jokinen, 1994), and even a full-#edged dialogue control mechanism (Sadek, Bretier & Panaget, 1997). In modelling dialogue contributions, they have focused on the appropriateness of types of speech acts, and on sequences with conditional alternatives.…”

Section: The Need For Handling Richly Structured Actions In Dialoguesmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Tailoring inference-rich descriptions through making compromises between conflicting cooperation principles

Horacek

2000

International Journal of Human-Computer Studies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Need For Handling Richly Structured Actions In Dialoguesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The remaining components of our model, awareness and logical inferences, are expressed by the predicates AWARE-OF, COHERENT and ABLE-INFER which are given domainspeci"c interpretations, elaborated for the domain of mathematics (formal details are given in Horacek, 1999).…”

Section: Application Of Our Model To the Interactive Presentation Of mentioning

confidence: 99%

Tailoring inference-rich descriptions through making compromises between conflicting cooperation principles

Horacek

2000

International Journal of Human-Computer Studies

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…19!. For assessing the addressee's awareness~AWARE-OF!, we test whether a piece of knowledge required is entailed in a list of theorems, definitions, and hierarchical relations assumed to be known to the addressee, which is expressed in a user model as simple stereotypes~see Ref.…”

Section: Degrees Of Explicitnessmentioning

confidence: 99%

Argumentation within deductive reasoning

Fiedler

Horacek

2006

Int. J. Intell. Syst.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Deductive reasoning is an area related to argumentation where machine-based techniques, notably theorem proving, can contribute substantially to the formation of arguments. However, making use of the functionality of theorem provers for this issue is associated with a number of difficulties and, as we will demonstrate, requires considerable effort for obtaining reasonable results. Aiming at the exploitation of machine-oriented reasoning for human-adequate argumentation in a broader sense, we present our model for producing proof presentations from machine-oriented inference structures. Capabilities of the model include adaptation to human-adequate degrees of granularity and explicitness in the underlying argumentation and interactive exploration of proofs. Enhancing capabilities in all these respects, even just those we have addressed so far, does not only improve the interactive use of theorem provers, but shows they are essential ingredients to support the functionality of dialog-oriented tutorial systems in formal domains.

show abstract

“…Horacek [13] presents an approach to transforming computer-generated proofs to a structure that more closely resembles mathematical proofs in natural language. The TRAMP-system by Meier [14] transforms resolution proofs into natural deduction proofs at the assertion level.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Understanding Resolution Proofs through Herbrand’s Theorem

Hetzl

Libal

Riener

et al. 2013

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Computer-generated proofs are usually difficult to grasp for a human reader. In this paper we present an approach to understanding resolution proofs through Herbrand's theorem and the implementation of a tool based on that approach. The information we take as primitive is which instances have been chosen for which quantifiers, in other words: an expansion tree. After computing an expansion tree from a resolution refutation, the user is presented this information in a graphical user interface that allows flexible folding and unfolding of parts of the proof. This interface provides a convenient way to focus on the relevant parts of a computer-generated proof. In this paper, we describe the prooftheoretic transformations, the implementation and demonstrate its usefulness on several examples.

show abstract

Presenting Proofs in a Human-Oriented Way

Cited by 14 publications

References 12 publications

Tailoring inference-rich descriptions through making compromises between conflicting cooperation principles

Tailoring inference-rich descriptions through making compromises between conflicting cooperation principles

Argumentation within deductive reasoning

Understanding Resolution Proofs through Herbrand’s Theorem

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About