Lucas-Interpretation Users Views Programmers from Users - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Lucas- Interpretation Walther Neuper Lucas-Interpretation User’s Views Programmers from Users’ Perspective Students Lucas- Interpretation Language Interpreter Walther Neuper Dialogue Summary Conclusions IICM, Institute for Computer Media, Programmers Students University of Technology. Graz, Austria ThEdu: Theorem Proving Components for Educational Software at CICM, Bialystok, Poland July 25, 2016

Lucas- Interpretation Outline Walther Neuper User’s Views User’s Views 1 Programmers Students Demo : Programmers’ View Lucas- Demo : Students’ View Interpretation Language Interpreter Dialogue Lucas-Interpretation 2 Summary The Language Conclusions Programmers The Interpreter Students Where is Interaction from? Summary 3 Conclusions for Users Usability for Programmers Self-explaning System for Students

Lucas- Interpretation Outline Walther Neuper User’s Views User’s Views 1 Programmers Students Demo : Programmers’ View Lucas- Demo : Students’ View Interpretation Language Interpreter Dialogue Lucas-Interpretation 2 Summary The Language Conclusions Programmers The Interpreter Students Where is Interaction from? Summary 3 Conclusions for Users Usability for Programmers Self-explaning System for Students

Lucas- Interpretation Programmers’ View Walther Neuper User’s Views Programmers Demonstration Students Lucas- Interpretation Language Interpreter Dialogue Summary: Summary Conclusions • Programming is painful presently . . . Programmers Students • program syntax checked as Isabelle term • rewrite-sets for execution compiled by hand • . . . thus migration to Isabelle’s function package • functional programs without input / output — where comes user-interaction from ???

Lucas- Interpretation Programmers’ View Walther Neuper User’s Views Programmers Demonstration Students Lucas- Interpretation Language Interpreter Dialogue Summary: Summary Conclusions • Programming is painful presently . . . Programmers Students • program syntax checked as Isabelle term • rewrite-sets for execution compiled by hand • . . . thus migration to Isabelle’s function package • functional programs without input / output — where comes user-interaction from ???

Lucas- Interpretation Programmers’ View Walther Neuper User’s Views Programmers Demonstration Students Lucas- Interpretation Language Interpreter Dialogue Summary: Summary Conclusions • Programming is painful presently . . . Programmers Students • program syntax checked as Isabelle term • rewrite-sets for execution compiled by hand • . . . thus migration to Isabelle’s function package • functional programs without input / output — where comes user-interaction from ???

Lucas- Interpretation Programmers’ View Walther Neuper User’s Views Programmers Demonstration Students Lucas- Interpretation Language Interpreter Dialogue Summary: Summary Conclusions • Programming is painful presently . . . Programmers Students • program syntax checked as Isabelle term • rewrite-sets for execution compiled by hand • . . . thus migration to Isabelle’s function package • functional programs without input / output — where comes user-interaction from ???

Lucas- Interpretation Outline Walther Neuper User’s Views User’s Views 1 Programmers Students Demo : Programmers’ View Lucas- Demo : Students’ View Interpretation Language Interpreter Dialogue Lucas-Interpretation 2 Summary The Language Conclusions Programmers The Interpreter Students Where is Interaction from? Summary 3 Conclusions for Users Usability for Programmers Self-explaning System for Students

Lucas- Interpretation Students’ View Walther Neuper User’s Views Programmers Demonstration Students Lucas- Interpretation Language Interpreter Dialogue Summary: Students require these services for learning . . . Summary Conclusions 1 check user input automatically, flexibly and reliably: Programmers Students Input establishes a proof situation (for automated proving) with respect to the logical context 2 give explanations on request by learners: All underlying mathematics knowledge is transparent due to the “LCF-paradigm” in Isabelle 3 propose a next step if learners get stuck: “next-step-guidance” due to Lucas-Interpretation.

Lucas- Interpretation Students’ View Walther Neuper User’s Views Programmers Demonstration Students Lucas- Interpretation Language Interpreter Dialogue Summary: Students require these services for learning . . . Summary Conclusions 1 check user input automatically, flexibly and reliably: Programmers Students Input establishes a proof situation (for automated proving) with respect to the logical context 2 give explanations on request by learners: All underlying mathematics knowledge is transparent due to the “LCF-paradigm” in Isabelle 3 propose a next step if learners get stuck: “next-step-guidance” due to Lucas-Interpretation.

Lucas- Interpretation Students’ View Walther Neuper User’s Views Programmers Demonstration Students Lucas- Interpretation Language Interpreter Dialogue Summary: Students require these services for learning . . . Summary Conclusions 1 check user input automatically, flexibly and reliably: Programmers Students Input establishes a proof situation (for automated proving) with respect to the logical context 2 give explanations on request by learners: All underlying mathematics knowledge is transparent due to the “LCF-paradigm” in Isabelle 3 propose a next step if learners get stuck: “next-step-guidance” due to Lucas-Interpretation.

Lucas- Interpretation Students’ View Walther Neuper User’s Views Programmers Demonstration Students Lucas- Interpretation Language Interpreter Dialogue Summary: Students require these services for learning . . . Summary Conclusions 1 check user input automatically, flexibly and reliably: Programmers Students Input establishes a proof situation (for automated proving) with respect to the logical context 2 give explanations on request by learners: All underlying mathematics knowledge is transparent due to the “LCF-paradigm” in Isabelle 3 propose a next step if learners get stuck: “next-step-guidance” due to Lucas-Interpretation.

Lucas- Interpretation Students’ View Walther Neuper User’s Views Programmers Demonstration Students Lucas- Interpretation Language Interpreter Dialogue Summary: Students require these services for learning . . . Summary Conclusions 1 check user input automatically, flexibly and reliably: Programmers Students Input establishes a proof situation (for automated proving) with respect to the logical context 2 give explanations on request by learners: All underlying mathematics knowledge is transparent due to the “LCF-paradigm” in Isabelle 3 propose a next step if learners get stuck: “next-step-guidance” due to Lucas-Interpretation.

Lucas- Interpretation Students’ View Walther Neuper User’s Views Programmers Demonstration Students Lucas- Interpretation Language Interpreter Dialogue Summary: Students require these services for learning . . . Summary Conclusions 1 check user input automatically, flexibly and reliably: Programmers Students Input establishes a proof situation (for automated proving) with respect to the logical context 2 give explanations on request by learners: All underlying mathematics knowledge is transparent due to the “LCF-paradigm” in Isabelle 3 propose a next step if learners get stuck: “next-step-guidance” due to Lucas-Interpretation.

Lucas- Interpretation Students’ View Walther Neuper User’s Views Programmers Demonstration Students Lucas- Interpretation Language Interpreter Dialogue Summary: Students require these services for learning . . . Summary Conclusions 1 check user input automatically, flexibly and reliably: Programmers Students Input establishes a proof situation (for automated proving) with respect to the logical context 2 give explanations on request by learners: All underlying mathematics knowledge is transparent due to the “LCF-paradigm” in Isabelle 3 propose a next step if learners get stuck: “next-step-guidance” due to Lucas-Interpretation.

Lucas- Interpretation Students’ View Walther Neuper User’s Views Programmers Demonstration Students Lucas- Interpretation Language Interpreter Dialogue Summary: Students require these services for learning . . . Summary Conclusions 1 check user input automatically, flexibly and reliably: Programmers Students Input establishes a proof situation (for automated proving) with respect to the logical context 2 give explanations on request by learners: All underlying mathematics knowledge is transparent due to the “LCF-paradigm” in Isabelle 3 propose a next step if learners get stuck: “next-step-guidance” due to Lucas-Interpretation.

Lucas- Interpretation Outline Walther Neuper User’s Views User’s Views 1 Programmers Students Demo : Programmers’ View Lucas- Demo : Students’ View Interpretation Language Interpreter Dialogue Lucas-Interpretation 2 Summary The Language Conclusions Programmers The Interpreter Students Where is Interaction from? Summary 3 Conclusions for Users Usability for Programmers Self-explaning System for Students