Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 cited by

Motivated proofs: What they are, why they matter and how to write them

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 2001.02657 v1 pith:WTH5OHJ2 submitted 2020-01-08 math.HO

classification math.HO
keywords motivatedproofstheymathematicalmathematiciansbenefitsexplanatorymatter
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal
0 comments
read the original abstract

Mathematicians judge proofs to possess, or lack, a variety of different qualities, including, for example, explanatory power, depth, purity, beauty and fit. Philosophers of mathematical practice have begun to investigate the nature of such qualities. However, mathematicians frequently draw attention to another desirable proof quality: being motivated. Intuitively, motivated proofs contain no "puzzling" steps, but they have received little further analysis. In this paper, I begin a philosophical investigation into motivated proofs. I suggest that a proof is motivated if and only if mathematicians can identify (i) the tasks each step is intended to perform; and (ii) where each step could have reasonably come from. I argue that motivated proofs promote understanding, convey new mathematical resources and stimulate new discoveries. They thus have significant epistemic benefits and directly contribute to the efficient dissemination and advancement of mathematical knowledge. Given their benefits, I also discuss the more practical matter of how we can produce motivated proofs. Finally I consider the relationship between motivated proofs and proofs which are explanatory, beautiful and fitting.

Discussion (0). Sign in 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. Proof2Hybrid: Automatic Mathematical Benchmark Synthesis for Proof-Centric Problems

    cs.CL 2025-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A fully automated pipeline produces proof-centric math benchmarks, demonstrated on algebraic geometry with 456 items, where leading LLMs score near 60 percent.

Pith tools