Author:
ASPERTI ANDREA,GEUVERS HERMAN,NATARAJAN RAJA
Abstract
In a controversial paper (De Millo et al. 1979) at the end of the 1970's, R. A. De Millo, R. J. Lipton and A. J. Perlis argued against formal verifications of programs, mostly motivating their position by an analogy with proofs in mathematics, and, in particular, with the impracticality of a strictly formalist approach to this discipline. The recent, impressive achievements in the field of interactive theorem proving provide an interesting ground for a critical revisiting of their theses. We believe that the social nature of proof and program development is uncontroversial and ineluctable, but formal verification is not antithetical to it. Formal verification should strive not only to cope with, but to ease and enhance the collaborative, organic nature of this process, eventually helping us to master the growing complexity of scientific knowledge.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
Computer Science Applications,Mathematics (miscellaneous)
Reference63 articles.
1. Philosophical perspectives on proof in mathematics education;Lee;Philosophy of Mathematics Education Journal,2002
2. Proofs and Refutations
3. Popper and Kuhn on the evolution of science;Hutcheon;Brock Review,1995
4. What in the name of Euclid is going on here?;MacKenzie;Science,2005
Cited by
18 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. On the Conciliation of Traditional and Computer-Assisted Proofs;Philosophical Studies Series;2022
2. History of Abstract Interpretation;IEEE Annals of the History of Computing;2021
3. BP: Formal Proofs, the Fine Print and Side Effects;2018 IEEE Cybersecurity Development (SecDev);2018-09
4. Simulations, explication, compréhension : essai d’analyse critique;Philosophia Scientae;2017-10-30
5. Position paper: the science of deep specification;Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences;2017-09-04