Explosive Proofs of Mathematical Truths. Viteri, S. & DeDeo, S. *arXiv*, 2020. Paper Website abstract bibtex Mathematical proofs are both paradigms of certainty and some of the most explicitly-justified arguments that we have in the cultural record. Their very explicitness, however, leads to a paradox, because their probability of error grows exponentially as the argument expands. Here we show that under a cognitively-plausible belief formation mechanism that combines deductive and abductive reasoning, mathematical arguments can undergo what we call an epistemic phase transition: a dramatic and rapidly-propagating jump from uncertainty to near-complete confidence at reasonable levels of claim-to-claim error rates. To show this, we analyze an unusual dataset of forty-eight machine-aided proofs from the formalized reasoning system Coq, including major theorems ranging from ancient to 21st Century mathematics, along with four hand-constructed cases from Euclid, Apollonius, Spinoza, and Andrew Wiles. Our results bear both on recent work in the history and philosophy of mathematics, and on a question, basic to cognitive science, of how we form beliefs, and justify them to others.

@article{
title = {Explosive Proofs of Mathematical Truths},
type = {article},
year = {2020},
identifiers = {[object Object]},
websites = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2004.00055},
id = {ea340b57-cd33-3791-86f2-b60fcbdd2be5},
created = {2020-11-25T00:57:32.270Z},
file_attached = {true},
profile_id = {b90fa0f0-b835-3487-8645-24bb43c8aba5},
group_id = {a91e2012-a2d1-3475-84d1-ff2f8b2ca743},
last_modified = {2020-11-25T01:02:03.772Z},
read = {false},
starred = {false},
authored = {false},
confirmed = {false},
hidden = {false},
folder_uuids = {cb689628-8825-4be3-9526-cd1da4d0adff},
private_publication = {false},
abstract = {Mathematical proofs are both paradigms of certainty and some of the most explicitly-justified arguments that we have in the cultural record. Their very explicitness, however, leads to a paradox, because their probability of error grows exponentially as the argument expands. Here we show that under a cognitively-plausible belief formation mechanism that combines deductive and abductive reasoning, mathematical arguments can undergo what we call an epistemic phase transition: a dramatic and rapidly-propagating jump from uncertainty to near-complete confidence at reasonable levels of claim-to-claim error rates. To show this, we analyze an unusual dataset of forty-eight machine-aided proofs from the formalized reasoning system Coq, including major theorems ranging from ancient to 21st Century mathematics, along with four hand-constructed cases from Euclid, Apollonius, Spinoza, and Andrew Wiles. Our results bear both on recent work in the history and philosophy of mathematics, and on a question, basic to cognitive science, of how we form beliefs, and justify them to others.},
bibtype = {article},
author = {Viteri, Scott and DeDeo, Simon},
journal = {arXiv},
number = {6}
}

Downloads: 0

{"_id":"gtbBcRAG4jWcRpt3L","bibbaseid":"viteri-dedeo-explosiveproofsofmathematicaltruths-2020","authorIDs":[],"author_short":["Viteri, S.","DeDeo, S."],"bibdata":{"title":"Explosive Proofs of Mathematical Truths","type":"article","year":"2020","identifiers":"[object Object]","websites":"http://arxiv.org/abs/2004.00055","id":"ea340b57-cd33-3791-86f2-b60fcbdd2be5","created":"2020-11-25T00:57:32.270Z","file_attached":"true","profile_id":"b90fa0f0-b835-3487-8645-24bb43c8aba5","group_id":"a91e2012-a2d1-3475-84d1-ff2f8b2ca743","last_modified":"2020-11-25T01:02:03.772Z","read":false,"starred":false,"authored":false,"confirmed":false,"hidden":false,"folder_uuids":"cb689628-8825-4be3-9526-cd1da4d0adff","private_publication":false,"abstract":"Mathematical proofs are both paradigms of certainty and some of the most explicitly-justified arguments that we have in the cultural record. Their very explicitness, however, leads to a paradox, because their probability of error grows exponentially as the argument expands. Here we show that under a cognitively-plausible belief formation mechanism that combines deductive and abductive reasoning, mathematical arguments can undergo what we call an epistemic phase transition: a dramatic and rapidly-propagating jump from uncertainty to near-complete confidence at reasonable levels of claim-to-claim error rates. To show this, we analyze an unusual dataset of forty-eight machine-aided proofs from the formalized reasoning system Coq, including major theorems ranging from ancient to 21st Century mathematics, along with four hand-constructed cases from Euclid, Apollonius, Spinoza, and Andrew Wiles. Our results bear both on recent work in the history and philosophy of mathematics, and on a question, basic to cognitive science, of how we form beliefs, and justify them to others.","bibtype":"article","author":"Viteri, Scott and DeDeo, Simon","journal":"arXiv","number":"6","bibtex":"@article{\n title = {Explosive Proofs of Mathematical Truths},\n type = {article},\n year = {2020},\n identifiers = {[object Object]},\n websites = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2004.00055},\n id = {ea340b57-cd33-3791-86f2-b60fcbdd2be5},\n created = {2020-11-25T00:57:32.270Z},\n file_attached = {true},\n profile_id = {b90fa0f0-b835-3487-8645-24bb43c8aba5},\n group_id = {a91e2012-a2d1-3475-84d1-ff2f8b2ca743},\n last_modified = {2020-11-25T01:02:03.772Z},\n read = {false},\n starred = {false},\n authored = {false},\n confirmed = {false},\n hidden = {false},\n folder_uuids = {cb689628-8825-4be3-9526-cd1da4d0adff},\n private_publication = {false},\n abstract = {Mathematical proofs are both paradigms of certainty and some of the most explicitly-justified arguments that we have in the cultural record. Their very explicitness, however, leads to a paradox, because their probability of error grows exponentially as the argument expands. Here we show that under a cognitively-plausible belief formation mechanism that combines deductive and abductive reasoning, mathematical arguments can undergo what we call an epistemic phase transition: a dramatic and rapidly-propagating jump from uncertainty to near-complete confidence at reasonable levels of claim-to-claim error rates. To show this, we analyze an unusual dataset of forty-eight machine-aided proofs from the formalized reasoning system Coq, including major theorems ranging from ancient to 21st Century mathematics, along with four hand-constructed cases from Euclid, Apollonius, Spinoza, and Andrew Wiles. Our results bear both on recent work in the history and philosophy of mathematics, and on a question, basic to cognitive science, of how we form beliefs, and justify them to others.},\n bibtype = {article},\n author = {Viteri, Scott and DeDeo, Simon},\n journal = {arXiv},\n number = {6}\n}","author_short":["Viteri, S.","DeDeo, S."],"urls":{"Paper":"https://bibbase.org/service/mendeley/b90fa0f0-b835-3487-8645-24bb43c8aba5/file/44a018c7-f9c6-019f-1935-bd3a244c4086/2020_ViteriDeDeo__ExplosiveProofsofMathematicalTruths.pdf.pdf","Website":"http://arxiv.org/abs/2004.00055"},"bibbaseid":"viteri-dedeo-explosiveproofsofmathematicaltruths-2020","role":"author","downloads":0},"bibtype":"article","creationDate":"2020-11-26T03:10:30.169Z","downloads":0,"keywords":[],"search_terms":["explosive","proofs","mathematical","truths","viteri","dedeo"],"title":"Explosive Proofs of Mathematical Truths","year":2020}