Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Elaboration in Dependent Type Theory

Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.

This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.

SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event

T0 review · schema-true

One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.

pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp

arxiv 1505.04324 v2 pith:OUUV5YTL submitted 2015-05-16 cs.LO

classification cs.LO
keywords elaborationtypealgorithmbeendependentdescribeexpressionslean
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

To be usable in practice, interactive theorem provers need to provide convenient and efficient means of writing expressions, definitions, and proofs. This involves inferring information that is often left implicit in an ordinary mathematical text, and resolving ambiguities in mathematical expressions. We refer to the process of passing from a quasi-formal and partially-specified expression to a completely precise formal one as elaboration. We describe an elaboration algorithm for dependent type theory that has been implemented in the Lean theorem prover. Lean's elaborator supports higher-order unification, type class inference, ad hoc overloading, insertion of coercions, the use of tactics, and the computational reduction of terms. The interactions between these components are subtle and complex, and the elaboration algorithm has been carefully designed to balance efficiency and usability. We describe the central design goals, and the means by which they are achieved.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Simplifying Formal Proof-Generating Models with ChatGPT and Basic Searching Techniques

    cs.LO 2025-02 conditional novelty 4.0 of 10

    A no-fine-tuning ChatGPT pipeline with breadth-first and depth-first tactic searches achieves a 31.15% pass rate on miniF2F in Lean, surpassing most but not all published baselines.

Pith tools