prove

安装量: 186
排名: #4618

安装

npx skills add https://github.com/parcadei/continuous-claude-v3 --skill prove

/prove - Machine-Verified Proofs (5-Phase Workflow)

For mathematicians who want verified proofs without learning Lean syntax.

Prerequisites

Before using this skill, check Lean4 is installed:

Check if lake is available

command -v lake &>/dev/null && echo "Lean4 installed" || echo "Lean4 NOT installed"

If not installed:

Install elan (Lean version manager)

curl https://raw.githubusercontent.com/leanprover/elan/master/elan-init.sh -sSf | sh

Restart shell, then verify

lake --version

First run of /prove will download Mathlib (~2GB) via lake build.

Usage /prove every group homomorphism preserves identity /prove Monsky's theorem /prove continuous functions on compact sets are uniformly continuous

The 5-Phase Workflow ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ 📚 RESEARCH → 🏗️ DESIGN → 🧪 TEST → ⚙️ IMPLEMENT → ✅ VERIFY │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Phase 1: RESEARCH (before any Lean)

Goal: Understand if/how this can be formalized.

Search Mathlib with Loogle (PRIMARY - type-aware search)

Use loogle for type signature search - finds lemmas by shape

loogle-search "pattern_here"

Examples:

loogle-search "Nontrivial _ ↔ _" # Find Nontrivial lemmas loogle-search "(?a → ?b) → List ?a → List ?b" # Map-like functions loogle-search "IsCyclic, center" # Multiple concepts

Query syntax:

_ = any single type ?a, ?b = type variables (same var = same type) Foo, Bar = must mention both

Search External - What's the known proof strategy?

Use Nia MCP if available: mcp__nia__search Use Perplexity MCP if available: mcp__perplexity__search Fall back to WebSearch for papers/references Check: Is there an existing formalization elsewhere (Coq, Isabelle)?

Identify Obstacles

What lemmas are NOT in Mathlib? Does proof require axioms beyond ZFC? (Choice, LEM, etc.) Is the statement even true? (search for counterexamples)

Output: Brief summary of proof strategy and obstacles

CHECKPOINT: If obstacles found, use AskUserQuestion:

"This requires [X]. Options: (a) restricted version, (b) accept axiom, (c) abort" Phase 2: DESIGN (skeleton with sorries)

Goal: Build proof structure before filling details.

Create Lean file with:

Imports Definitions needed Main theorem statement Helper lemmas as sorry

Annotate each sorry:

-- SORRY: needs proof (straightforward) -- SORRY: needs proof (complex - ~50 lines) -- AXIOM CANDIDATE: v₂ constraint - will test in Phase 3

Verify skeleton compiles (with sorries)

Output: proofs/.lean with annotated structure

Phase 3: TEST (counterexample search)

Goal: Catch false lemmas BEFORE trying to prove them.

For each AXIOM CANDIDATE sorry:

Generate test cases

-- Create #eval or example statements

eval testLemma (randomInput1) -- should return true

eval testLemma (randomInput2) -- should return true

Run tests

lake env lean test_lemmas.lean

If counterexample found:

Report the counterexample Use AskUserQuestion: "Lemma is FALSE. Options: (a) restrict domain, (b) reformulate, (c) abort"

CHECKPOINT: Only proceed if all axiom candidates pass testing.

Phase 4: IMPLEMENT (fill sorries)

Goal: Complete the proofs.

Standard iteration loop:

Pick a sorry Write proof attempt Compiler-in-the-loop checks (hook fires automatically) If error, Godel-Prover suggests fixes Iterate until sorry is filled Repeat for all sorries

Tools active:

compiler-in-the-loop hook (on every Write) Godel-Prover suggestions (on errors) Phase 5: VERIFY (audit)

Goal: Confirm proof quality.

Axiom Audit

lake build && grep "depends on axioms" output

Standard: propext, Classical.choice, Quot.sound ✓ Custom axioms: LIST EACH ONE

Sorry Count

grep -c "sorry" proofs/.lean

Must be 0 for "complete" proof

Generate Summary

✓ MACHINE VERIFIED (or ⚠️ PARTIAL - N axioms)

Theorem: Proof Strategy:

Proved: - -

Axiomatized (if any): - :

File: proofs/.lean

Research Tool Priority

Use whatever's available, in order:

Tool Best For Command Loogle Type signature search (PRIMARY) loogle-search "pattern" Nia MCP Library documentation mcp__nia__search Perplexity MCP Proof strategies, papers mcp__perplexity__search WebSearch General references WebSearch tool WebFetch Specific paper/page content WebFetch tool

Loogle setup: Requires ~/tools/loogle with Mathlib index. Run loogle-server & for fast queries.

If no search tools available, proceed with caution and note "research phase skipped".

Checkpoints (automatic)

The workflow pauses for user input when:

⚠️ Research finds obstacles ❌ Testing finds counterexamples 🔄 Implementation hits unfillable sorry after N attempts Output Format ┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ ✓ MACHINE VERIFIED │ │ │ │ Theorem: ∀ φ : G →* H, φ(1_G) = 1_H │ │ │ │ Proof Strategy: Direct application of │ │ MonoidHom.map_one from Mathlib. │ │ │ │ Phases: │ │ 📚 Research: Found in Mathlib.Algebra.Group.Hom │ │ 🏗️ Design: Single lemma, no sorries needed │ │ 🧪 Test: N/A (trivial) │ │ ⚙️ Implement: 3 lines │ │ ✅ Verify: 0 custom axioms, 0 sorries │ │ │ │ File: proofs/group_hom_identity.lean │ └─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

What I Can Prove Domain Examples Category Theory Functors, natural transformations, Yoneda Abstract Algebra Groups, rings, homomorphisms Topology Continuity, compactness, connectedness Analysis Limits, derivatives, integrals Logic Propositional, first-order Limitations Complex proofs may take multiple iterations Novel research-level proofs may exceed capabilities Some statements are unprovable over ℚ (need ℝ extension) Behind The Scenes Lean 4.26.0 - Theorem prover Mathlib - 100K+ formalized theorems Godel-Prover - AI tactic suggestions (via LMStudio) Compiler-in-the-loop - Automatic verification on every write Research tools - Nia, Perplexity, WebSearch (graceful degradation) See Also /loogle-search - Search Mathlib by type signature (used in Phase 1 RESEARCH) /math-router - For computation (integrals, equations) /lean4 - Direct Lean syntax access

返回排行榜