
arXiv: 1202.4832
Herewith, a fairly old concept is published for the first time and named "Lucas Interpretation". This has been implemented in a prototype, which has been proved useful in educational practice and has gained academic relevance with an emerging generation of educational mathematics assistants (EMA) based on Computer Theorem Proving (CTP). Automated Theorem Proving (ATP), i.e. deduction, is the most reliable technology used to check user input. However ATP is inherently weak in automatically generating solutions for arbitrary problems in applied mathematics. This weakness is crucial for EMAs: when ATP checks user input as incorrect and the learner gets stuck then the system should be able to suggest possible next steps. The key idea of Lucas Interpretation is to compute the steps of a calculation following a program written in a novel CTP-based programming language, i.e. computation provides the next steps. User guidance is generated by combining deduction and computation: the latter is performed by a specific language interpreter, which works like a debugger and hands over control to the learner at breakpoints, i.e. tactics generating the steps of calculation. The interpreter also builds up logical contexts providing ATP with the data required for checking user input, thus combining computation and deduction. The paper describes the concepts underlying Lucas Interpretation so that open questions can adequately be addressed, and prerequisites for further work are provided.
In Proceedings THedu'11, arXiv:1202.4535
I.2.2, FOS: Computer and information sciences, Computer Science - Logic in Computer Science, I.2.3, Computer Science - Programming Languages, I.2.5, D.3.2, Computer Science - Human-Computer Interaction, QA75.5-76.95, Logic in Computer Science (cs.LO), Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC), Electronic computers. Computer science, QA1-939, F.4.1, D.3.2; F.4.1; I.2.3; I.2.2; I.2.3; I.2.5, Mathematics, Programming Languages (cs.PL)
I.2.2, FOS: Computer and information sciences, Computer Science - Logic in Computer Science, I.2.3, Computer Science - Programming Languages, I.2.5, D.3.2, Computer Science - Human-Computer Interaction, QA75.5-76.95, Logic in Computer Science (cs.LO), Human-Computer Interaction (cs.HC), Electronic computers. Computer science, QA1-939, F.4.1, D.3.2; F.4.1; I.2.3; I.2.2; I.2.3; I.2.5, Mathematics, Programming Languages (cs.PL)
| selected citations These citations are derived from selected sources. This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 5 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
