arXiv Science⌕ Search
Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 2603.20893

An Alternative Approach to Formal Mathematics that Focuses on Communication and Accessibility

William M. Farmer
View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

Formal mathematics is mathematics done within the framework of a formal logic. It offers major benefits to mathematicians as well as to computing professionals, engineers, and scientists who use mathematics in their work. The standard approach to formal mathematics, in which mathematics is done with the help of a proof assistant and all details are formally proved and mechanically checked, achieves these benefits and offers a very high level of assurance that the results produced are correct. However, since the main goal of the standard approach is certification, the proof assistants supporting the standard approach are generally complex, based on unfamiliar logics, difficult to learn how to use, and far removed from mathematical practice. Thus the standard approach does not adequately serve mathematics practitioners who are more interested in communicating mathematical ideas than in formally certifying their correctness or who prefer not to make the investment needed to gain proficiency in the use of a proof assistant. This paper presents an alternative to the standard approach that focuses on communication and accessibility, the two weaknesses of the standard approach. It is called the free approach to formal mathematics since it is free of the obligation to formally prove and mechanically check all details of a mathematical development. The paper argues that the free approach would serve the needs of the average mathematics practitioner much better than the standard approach. It describes an implementation of the free approach based on a logic named Alonzo, a practice-oriented version of Alonzo Church's formulation of simple type theory. And it calls for the mathematics community to develop logics, software, and libraries of formal mathematical knowledge to support the free approach and to train mathematics practitioners to use them.

Explore related subjects

math.LOcs.LO

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

William M. Farmer. 2026-07-07. An Alternative Approach to Formal Mathematics that Focuses on Communication and Accessibility. https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.20893

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

On Borel sets in ideal topologies

We study the Borel and analytic subsets of the spaces ${}^κκ$ and ${}^κ2$ endowed with ideal topologies, where $κ$ is a regular uncountable cardinal, thereby addressing some open problems of the literature. We provide a systematic analysis of the Borel hierarchy for an arbitrary ideal topology. In particular, we formulate a sufficient condition ensuring that the hierarchy does not collapse, demonstrate that every Borel set in such a topology is analytic, and establish the existence of a set that is not Borel. Our main result shows that, when the underlying ideal contains an unbounded subset, the collection of analytic sets coincides with the full power set of the ambient space. Finally, we prove that the Approximation Lemma holds in the setting of ideal topologies.

math.LO↗
arXiv2026

Inquisitive first-order logic is neither compact nor recursively axiomatizable

Inquisitive first-order logic is an extension of classical first-order logic with formulas regimenting first-order questions, such as "whether all objects are P", "which objects are P", and "what is one object that is P". Since it was first developed in 2009, two major meta-theoretical questions about this logic have remained open, in spite of significant efforts. The first concerns compactness: if a conclusion follows from a set of premises, does it always follow from some finite subset? The second concerns the computational status of validity: is the set of validities recursively enumerable, or equivalently, does the logic admit a recursive axiomatization? We settle both questions in the negative, showing that inquisitive first-order logic is neither compact nor recursively axiomatizable. Furthermore, we prove that it violates another signature property of first-order logic, namely, Craig interpolation. We discuss the significance of our results, and show how to extend them to a closely related logic, viz., inquisitive team logic.

math.LO↗
arXiv2026

The Borel Distinguishing Number of Schreier Graphs

The Borel distinguishing number $D_B(\mathcal{G})$ of a Borel graph $\mathcal{G}$, recently introduced by Bilge and Kaya, is the minimum number of colors required to break the symmetry of $\mathcal{G}$ in a Borel way. In this paper, we investigate the Borel distinguishing number of Schreier graphs induced by the free part of the shift action $Γ\curvearrowright n^Γ$. We prove that $D_B(\mathcal{G})\le n+1$ for $Γ=\mathbb{Z}^d$ equipped with the standard generators. Moreover, we show that $D_B(\mathcal{G})\ge n+1$ if $ Γ$ is amenable and $ \{γ\in \mathrm{Aut}(\mathrm{Cay}(Γ,S)) \mid γ(e) = e \}$ is non-trivial. We also show that $D_B(\mathcal{G})$ is finite if $Γ$ is finitely generated, and give some applications of our results. These results answer some questions raised by Bilge and Kaya.

math.LO↗