Automated reasoning in geometry theorem proving with Prolog
Journal of Automated Reasoning
Using Gröbner bases to reason about geometry problems
Journal of Symbolic Computation
Cognitive modeling and intelligent tutoring
Artificial Intelligence - Special issue on artificial intelligence and learning environments
Empirical explorations of the geometry-theorem proving machine
Computers & thought
A Deductive Database Approach to Automated Geometry Theorem Proving and Discovering
Journal of Automated Reasoning
Minimally Invasive Tutoring of Complex Physics Problem Solving
ITS '02 Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Intelligent Tutoring Systems
A Class of Geometry Statements of Constructive Type and Geometry TheoremProving
A Class of Geometry Statements of Constructive Type and Geometry TheoremProving
Advanced Geometry Tutor: An intelligent tutor that teaches proof-writing with construction
Proceedings of the 2005 conference on Artificial Intelligence in Education: Supporting Learning through Intelligent and Socially Informed Technology
Geometry Constructions Language
Journal of Automated Reasoning
Automatic verification of regular constructions in dynamic geometry systems
ADG'06 Proceedings of the 6th international conference on Automated deduction in geometry
Synthesizing geometry constructions
Proceedings of the 32nd ACM SIGPLAN conference on Programming language design and implementation
Integrating dynamic geometry software, deduction systems, and theorem repositories
MKM'06 Proceedings of the 5th international conference on Mathematical Knowledge Management
GCLC: a tool for constructive euclidean geometry and more than that
ICMS'06 Proceedings of the Second international conference on Mathematical Software
System description: GCLCprover + geothms
IJCAR'06 Proceedings of the Third international joint conference on Automated Reasoning
Hi-index | 0.00 |
This study investigates a procedure for proving arithmetic-free Euclidean geometry theorems that involve construction. “Construction” means drawing additional geometric elements in the problem figure. Some geometry theorems require construction as a part of the proof. The basic idea of our construction procedure is to add only elements required for applying a postulate that has a consequence that unifies with a goal to be proven. In other words, construction is made only if it supports backward application of a postulate. Our major finding is that our proof procedure is semi-complete and useful in practice. In particular, an empirical evaluation showed that our theorem prover, GRAMY, solves all arithmetic-free construction problems from a sample of school textbooks and 86% of the arithmetic-free construction problems solved by preceding studies of automated geometry theorem proving.