Set Theory and Logic


Refutation of Lean Theorem Prover from Microsoft

Authors: Colin James III

These examples were found not tautologous: (∀x,px→r)↔(∃x,px)→r; (∃x,px→r)↔(∀x,px)→r; (∃x,r→px)↔(r→∃x,px). Hence Lean prover from Microsoft is not bivalent and refuted.

Comments: 1 Page. Copyright © 2018 by Colin James III All rights reserved. Respond to this author's email address: info@ersatz-systems dot com. (We instruct troll Mikko at Disqus to read the entire article twice before she starts typing.)

Download: PDF

Submission history

[v1] 2018-08-07 15:06:59

Unique-IP document downloads: 60 times is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.

Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.

comments powered by Disqus