文件名称:PhDPropsversion4
下载
别用迅雷、360浏览器下载。
如迅雷强制弹出,可右键点击选“另存为”。
失败请重下,重下不扣分。
如迅雷强制弹出,可右键点击选“另存为”。
失败请重下,重下不扣分。
介绍说明--下载内容均来自于网络,请自行研究使用
PhD Proposals Automated theorem proving (ATP) in geometry has two major lines of research:
axiomatic proof style and algebraic proof style (see [6], for instance, for a survey).
Algebraic proof style methods are based on reducing geometry properties to algebraic
properties expressed in terms of Cartesian coordinates. These methods are usually very
efficient, but the proofs they produce do not reflect the geometry nature of the problem
and they give only a yes/no conclusion. Axiomatic methods attempt to automate
traditional geometry proof methods that produce human-readable proofs. Building on
top of the existing ATPs (namely GCLCprover [5, 4, 8, 9, 10] to the area method [1, 2, 3,
7, 8, 11] or ATPs dealing with construction [6] the goal is to built an ATP capable of
producing human-readable proofs, with a clean connection between the geometric
conjectures and theirs proofs.
axiomatic proof style and algebraic proof style (see [6], for instance, for a survey).
Algebraic proof style methods are based on reducing geometry properties to algebraic
properties expressed in terms of Cartesian coordinates. These methods are usually very
efficient, but the proofs they produce do not reflect the geometry nature of the problem
and they give only a yes/no conclusion. Axiomatic methods attempt to automate
traditional geometry proof methods that produce human-readable proofs. Building on
top of the existing ATPs (namely GCLCprover [5, 4, 8, 9, 10] to the area method [1, 2, 3,
7, 8, 11] or ATPs dealing with construction [6] the goal is to built an ATP capable of
producing human-readable proofs, with a clean connection between the geometric
conjectures and theirs proofs.
(系统自动生成,下载前可以参看下载内容)
下载文件列表
PhDPropsversion4.pdf