一个方差公式的多种证明

运用方差性质,协方差定义,函数凸性等方法,给出一个方差公式Var max(a,X)≤Var X的多种证明.     

Prototype Proofs in Type Theory

The proofs of universally quantified statements, in mathematics, are given as “schemata” or as “prototypes” which may be applied to each specific instance of the quantified variable. Type Theory allows to turn into a rigorous notion this informal intuition described by many, including Herbrand. In this constructive approach where propositions are types, proofs are viewed as terms of λ‐calculus and act as “proof‐schemata”, as for universally quantified types. We examine here the critical case of Impredicative Type Theory, i. e. Girard's system F, where type‐quantification ranges over all types. Coherence and decidability properties are proved for prototype proofs in this impredicative context.     

Hypothetical Logic of Proofs

The logic of proofs is a refinement of modal logic introduced by Artemov in 1995 in which the modality ?A is revisited as ?t?A where t is an expression that bears witness to the validity of A. It enjoys arithmetical soundness and completeness and is capable of reflecting its own proofs (?A implies ? ?t?A, for some t). We develop the Hypothetical Logic of Proofs, a reformulation of LP based on judgemental reasoning.     

Exploring the Link Between Preservice Teachers' Conception of Proof and the Use of Dynamic Geometry Software

This case study investigated how secondary preservice mathematics teachers perceive the need for and the benefits of formal proof when given geometric tasks in the context of dynamic geometry software. Results indicate that preservice teachers are concerned that after using dynamic software high school students will not see the need for proofs. The participants stated that multiple examples are not equivalent to a proof but, nonetheless, questioned the value of formal proof for high school students. Finally, preservice teachers found the greatest value of geometric software to be in helping students understand key relationships within a problem or theorem. Participants also tended to study a problem more deeply with the software than without it.     

Other Proofs of Old Results

We transform the proof of the second incompleteness theorem given in [3] to a proof-theoretic version, avoiding the use of the arithmetized completeness theorem. We give also new proofs of old results: The Arithmetical Hierarchy Theorem and Tarski's Theorem on undefinability of truth; the proofs in which the construction of a sentence by means of diagonalization lemma is not needed.     

Proofs and Countermodels in Non-Classical Logics

Proofs and countermodels are the two sides of completeness proofs, but, in general, failure to find one does not automatically give the other. The limitation is encountered also for decidable non-classical logics in traditional completeness proofs based on Henkin’s method of maximal consistent sets of formulas. A method is presented that makes it possible to establish completeness in a direct way: For any given sequent either a proof in the given logical system or a countermodel in the corresponding frame class is found. The method is a synthesis of a generation of calculi with internalized relational semantics, a Tait–Schütte–Takeuti style completeness proof, and procedures to finitize the countermodel construction. Finitizations for intuitionistic propositional logic are obtained through the search for a minimal derivation, through pruning of infinite branches in search trees by means of a suitable syntactic counterpart of semantic filtration, or through a proof-theoretic embedding into an appropriate provability logic. A number of examples illustrates the method, its subtleties, challenges, and present scope.     

Possible Student Justification of Proofs

The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics calls for an increased emphasis on proof and reasoning in school mathematics curricula. Given such an emphasis, mathematics teachers must be prepared to structure curricular experiences so that students develop an appreciation for both the value of proof and for those strategies that will assist them in developing proving skills. Such an outcome is more likely when the teacher feels secure in his/her own understanding of the concept of “mathematical proof” and understands the ways in which students progress as they take on increasingly more complex mathematical justifications. In this article, a model of mathematical proof, based on Balacheff's Taxonomy of Mathematical Proof, outlining the levels through which students might progress as they develop proving skills is discussed. Specifically, examples of the various ways in which students operating at different levels of skill sophistication could approach three different mathematical proof tasks are presented. By considering proofs under this model, teachers are apt to gain a better understanding of each student's entry skill level and so effectively guide him/her toward successively more sophisticated skill development.     

概率论中一类矩不等式的证明

运用证明单边车贝雪夫不等式的方法证明了几个矩不等式,并通过反例说明文献[4]中的一结论是错误的.     

微分学中不等式的证明

针对微分学不等式列出五种常用证明方法,即利用单调性证明法,利用拉格朗日中值定理证明法,利用最值证明法,利用泰勒公式证明法,和利用凹凸性证明法.实例说明每种方法的使用细节,以达到使初学者能尽快掌握微分学不等式证明的目的.     

Transparent Long Proofs: A First PCP Theorem for NPR

We introduce and study the notion of probabilistically checkable proofs (PCP) for real number algorithms. Our starting point is the computational model of Blum, Shub, and Smale (BSS) and the real analogue NP_R of NP in that model. We define in a straightforward manner verifiers as well as complexity classes PCP_R(r(n),q(n)) for the BSS model. Our main result is, to the best of our knowledge, the first PCP theorem for NP_R. It states that each problem in NP_R has transparent long proofs, i.e.,NP_R \subseteq PCP_R(poly,1), where poly denotes the class of univariate polynomial functions. The techniques used extend ideas from [12] for self-testing and self-correcting certain functions over so-called rational domains to more general domains over the real numbers. The latter arise from the particular NP_R-complete problem for which we construct a verifier of the required form.     

A synopsis of Combinatorial Integral Geometry

A Lie coalgebra is a coalgebra whose comultiplication Δ : M → M ? M satisfies the Lie conditions. Just as any algebra A whose multiplication ? : A ? A → A is associative gives rise to an associated Lie algebra $\text{L}$(A), so any coalgebra C whose comultiplication Δ : C → C ? C is associative gives rise to an associated Lie coalgebra $\text{L}$^c(C). The assignment C ? $\text{L}$^c(C) is functorial. A universal coenveloping coalgebra Uc(M) is defined for any Lie Lie coalgebra M by asking for a right adjoint U^c to $\text{L}$^c. This is analogous to defining a universal enveloping algebra U(L) for any Lie algebra L by asking for a left adjoint U to the functor $\text{L}$. In the case of Lie algebras, the unit (i.e., front adjunction) 1 → $\text{L}$ o U of the adjoint functor pair U ? $\text{L}$ is always injective. This follows from the Poincaré-Birkhoff-Witt theorem, and is equivalent to it in characteristic zero (x = 0). It is, therefore, natural to inquire about the counit (i.e., back adjunction) $\text{L}$^c o U^c → 1 of the adjoint functor pair $\text{L}$^c ? U^c.Theorem. For any Lie coalgebra M, the natural map$\text{L}$^c(U^cM) → M is surjective if and only if M is locally finite, (i.e., each element of M lies in a finite dimensional sub Lie coalgebra of M).An example is given of a non locally finite Lie coalgebra. The existence of such an example is surprising since any coalgebra C whose diagonal Δ is associative is necessarily locally finite by a result of that theory. The present paper concludes with a development of an analog of the Poincaré-Birkhoff-Witt theorem for Lie algebras which we choose to call the Dual Poincaré-Birkhoff-Witt Theorem and abbreviate by “The Dual PBWθ.” The constraints of the present paper, however, allow only a sketch of this theorem. A complete proof will appear in a subsequent paper. The reader may, however, consult [12], in the meantime, for details. The Dual PBWθ shows for any locally finite Lie coalgebra M the existence (in χ = 0) of a natural isomorphism of the graded Hopf algebras ₀E(U^cM) and ₀E(S^cM) associated to U^cM and to S^cM = U^c(TrivM) when U^c(M) and S^c(M) are given the Lie filtrations. [Just as U^c(M) is the analog of the enveloping algebra U(L) of a Lie algebra L, so S^c(V) is the analog of the symmetric algebra S(V) on a vector space V. Triv(M) denotes the trivial Lie coalgebra structure on the underlying vector space of M obtained by taking the comultiplication to be the zero map.]     

Proofs as bearers of mathematical knowledge

Yehuda Rav’s inspiring paper “Why do we prove theorems?” published in Philosophia Mathematica (1999, 7, pp. 5–41) has interesting implications for mathematics education. We examine Rav’s central ideas on proof—that proofs convey important elements of mathematics such as strategies and methods, that it is “proofs rather than theorems that are the bearers of mathematical knowledge”and thus that proofs should be the primary focus of mathematical interest—and then discuss their significance for mathematics education in general and for the teaching of proof in particular.     

From Mandarin to Midwife: A Teacher's Journal

Abstract

The Half-Opened Door: Discrimination and Admissions at Harvard. Yale, and Princeton, 1900–1970 by Marcia Graham Synnott. Westport, Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 231 pages, $23.95.     

一道极限题的四种证法

分别利用泰勒公式、不动点理论结合牛顿迭代法,给出一道关于极限问题的四种证明方法．