
AbstractFor interactive theorem provers a very desirable property is consistency: it should not be possible to prove false theorems. However, this is not enough: it also should not be possible to think that a theorem that actually is false has been proved. More precisely: the user should be able to know what it is that the interactive theorem prover is proving.To make these issues concrete we introduce the notion of Pollack-consistency. This property is related to a system being able to correctly parse formulas that it printed itself. In current systems it happens regularly that this fails.We argue that a good interactive theorem prover should be Pollack-consistent. We show with examples that many interactive theorem provers currently are not Pollack-consistent. Finally we describe a simple approach for making a system Pollack-consistent, which only consists of a small modification to the printing code of the system.
Pollack consistency, consistency, Data Science, Interactive theorem prover, Theoretical Computer Science, Computer Science(all)
Pollack consistency, consistency, Data Science, Interactive theorem prover, Theoretical Computer Science, Computer Science(all)
| 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). | 8 | |
| 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). | Top 10% | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
