A Comparison of Mizar and Isar

The mathematical proof checker Mizar by Andrzej Trybulec uses a proof input language that is much more readable than the input languages of most other proof assistants. This system also differs in many other respects from most current systems. John Harrison has shown that one can have a Mizar mode on top of a tactical prover, allowing one to combine a mathematical proof language with other styles of proof checking. Currently the only fully developed Mizar mode in this style is the Isar proof language for the Isabelle theorem prover. In fact the Isar language has become the official input language to the Isabelle system, even though many users still use its low-level tactical part only. In this paper we compare Mizar and Isar. A small example, Euclid's proof of the existence of infinitely many primes, is shown in both systems. We also include slightly higher-level views of formal proof sketches. Moreover, a list of differences between Mizar and Isar is presented, highlighting the strengths of both systems from the perspective of end-users. Finally, we point out some key differences of the internal mechanisms of structured proof processing in either system.

[1]  Gertrud Bauer,et al.  Computer-Assisted Mathematics at Work (The Hahn-Banach Theorem in Isabelle/Isar) , 1999, TYPES.

[2]  Tobias Nipkow,et al.  A Proof Assistant for Higher-Order Logic , 2002 .

[3]  Richard J. Boulton,et al.  Theorem Proving in Higher Order Logics , 2003, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[4]  Markus Wenzel,et al.  Isabelle, Isar - a versatile environment for human readable formal proof documents , 2002 .

[5]  Markus Wenzel,et al.  Isar - A Generic Interpretative Approach to Readable Formal Proof Documents , 1999, TPHOLs.

[6]  Freek Wiedijk.  Mizar : An Impression , 1999 .

[7]  Freek Wiedijk,et al.  Formal Proof Sketches , 2003, TYPES.

[8]  Gertrud Bauer,et al.  Calculational Reasoning Revisited (An Isabelle/Isar Experience) , 2001, TPHOLs.

[9]  Freek Wiedijk,et al.  Mizar Light for HOL Light , 2001, TPHOLs.

[10]  Andrzej Trybulec.  Some Features of the Mizar Language , 1993 .

[11]  Lawrence C. Paulson,et al.  The foundation of a generic theorem prover , 1989, Journal of Automated Reasoning.

[12]  Vincent Zammit.  On the readability of machine checkable formal proofs , 1999 .

[13]  de Ng Dick Bruijn,et al.  The Mathematical Vernacular, A Language for Mathematics with Typed Sets , 1994 .

[14]  Don Syme,et al.  Three Tactic Theorem Proving , 1999, TPHOLs.

[15]  Donald Robert Syme.  Declarative theorem proving for operational semantics , 1999 .

[16]  Bor-Yuh Evan Chang,et al.  Human-Readable Machine-Verifiable Proofs for Teaching Constructive Logic , 2001 .

[17]  Lawrence Charles Paulson,et al.  Isabelle: A Generic Theorem Prover , 1994 .

[18]  Piotr Rudnicki,et al.  An Overview of the MIZAR Project , 1992 .

[19]  John Harrison,et al.  A Mizar Mode for HOL , 1996, TPHOLs.

[20]  F. Wiedijk.  The Mathematical Vernacular , 2000 .

[21]  David Aspinall,et al.  Proof General: A Generic Tool for Proof Development , 2000, TACAS.

[22]  Don Syme.  DECLARE: A Prototype Declarative Proof System for Higher Order Logic , 1997 .

[23]  Vincent Zammit,et al.  On the Implementation of an Extensible Declarative Proof Language , 1999, TPHOLs.

[24]  Tobias Nipkow,et al.  Proof Terms for Simply Typed Higher Order Logic , 2000, TPHOLs.