スキル一覧に戻る
parcadei

prove

by parcadei

proveは、システム間の統合と連携を実現するスキルです。APIとデータの統合により、シームレスな情報フローと業務効率の向上をサポートします。

3,352🍴 252📅 2026年1月23日
GitHubで見るManusで実行

SKILL.md


name: prove description: Formal theorem proving with research, testing, and verification phases triggers: ["prove", "verify", "show that", "is it true", "formalize"] allowed-tools: [Bash, Read, Write, Edit, WebSearch, WebFetch, AskUserQuestion, Grep, Glob] priority: high

/prove - Machine-Verified Proofs (5-Phase Workflow)

For mathematicians who want verified proofs without learning Lean syntax.

Prerequisites

Before using this skill, check Lean4 is installed:

# Check if lake is available
command -v lake &>/dev/null && echo "Lean4 installed" || echo "Lean4 NOT installed"

If not installed:

# Install elan (Lean version manager)
curl https://raw.githubusercontent.com/leanprover/elan/master/elan-init.sh -sSf | sh

# Restart shell, then verify
lake --version

First run of /prove will download Mathlib (~2GB) via lake build.

Usage

/prove every group homomorphism preserves identity
/prove Monsky's theorem
/prove continuous functions on compact sets are uniformly continuous

The 5-Phase Workflow

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│  📚 RESEARCH → 🏗️ DESIGN → 🧪 TEST → ⚙️ IMPLEMENT → ✅ VERIFY  │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Phase 1: RESEARCH (before any Lean)

Goal: Understand if/how this can be formalized.

  1. Search Mathlib with Loogle (PRIMARY - type-aware search)

    # Use loogle for type signature search - finds lemmas by shape
    loogle-search "pattern_here"
    
    # Examples:
    loogle-search "Nontrivial _ ↔ _"           # Find Nontrivial lemmas
    loogle-search "(?a → ?b) → List ?a → List ?b"  # Map-like functions
    loogle-search "IsCyclic, center"           # Multiple concepts
    

    Query syntax:

    • _ = any single type
    • ?a, ?b = type variables (same var = same type)
    • Foo, Bar = must mention both
  2. Search External - What's the known proof strategy?

    • Use Nia MCP if available: mcp__nia__search
    • Use Perplexity MCP if available: mcp__perplexity__search
    • Fall back to WebSearch for papers/references
    • Check: Is there an existing formalization elsewhere (Coq, Isabelle)?
  3. Identify Obstacles

    • What lemmas are NOT in Mathlib?
    • Does proof require axioms beyond ZFC? (Choice, LEM, etc.)
    • Is the statement even true? (search for counterexamples)
  4. Output: Brief summary of proof strategy and obstacles

CHECKPOINT: If obstacles found, use AskUserQuestion:

  • "This requires [X]. Options: (a) restricted version, (b) accept axiom, (c) abort"

Phase 2: DESIGN (skeleton with sorries)

Goal: Build proof structure before filling details.

  1. Create Lean file with:

    • Imports
    • Definitions needed
    • Main theorem statement
    • Helper lemmas as sorry
  2. Annotate each sorry:

    -- SORRY: needs proof (straightforward)
    -- SORRY: needs proof (complex - ~50 lines)
    -- AXIOM CANDIDATE: v₂ constraint - will test in Phase 3
    
  3. Verify skeleton compiles (with sorries)

Output: proofs/<theorem_name>.lean with annotated structure

Goal: Catch false lemmas BEFORE trying to prove them.

For each AXIOM CANDIDATE sorry:

  1. Generate test cases

    -- Create #eval or example statements
    #eval testLemma (randomInput1)  -- should return true
    #eval testLemma (randomInput2)  -- should return true
    
  2. Run tests

    lake env lean test_lemmas.lean
    
  3. If counterexample found:

    • Report the counterexample
    • Use AskUserQuestion: "Lemma is FALSE. Options: (a) restrict domain, (b) reformulate, (c) abort"

CHECKPOINT: Only proceed if all axiom candidates pass testing.

Phase 4: IMPLEMENT (fill sorries)

Goal: Complete the proofs.

Standard iteration loop:

  1. Pick a sorry
  2. Write proof attempt
  3. Compiler-in-the-loop checks (hook fires automatically)
  4. If error, Godel-Prover suggests fixes
  5. Iterate until sorry is filled
  6. Repeat for all sorries

Tools active:

  • compiler-in-the-loop hook (on every Write)
  • Godel-Prover suggestions (on errors)

Phase 5: VERIFY (audit)

Goal: Confirm proof quality.

  1. Axiom Audit

    lake build && grep "depends on axioms" output
    
    • Standard: propext, Classical.choice, Quot.sound ✓
    • Custom axioms: LIST EACH ONE
  2. Sorry Count

    grep -c "sorry" proofs/<file>.lean
    
    • Must be 0 for "complete" proof
  3. Generate Summary

    ✓ MACHINE VERIFIED (or ⚠️ PARTIAL - N axioms)
    
    Theorem: <statement>
    Proof Strategy: <brief description>
    
    Proved:
    - <lemma 1>
    - <lemma 2>
    
    Axiomatized (if any):
    - <axiom>: <why it's needed>
    
    File: proofs/<name>.lean
    

Research Tool Priority

Use whatever's available, in order:

ToolBest ForCommand
LoogleType signature search (PRIMARY)loogle-search "pattern"
Nia MCPLibrary documentationmcp__nia__search
Perplexity MCPProof strategies, papersmcp__perplexity__search
WebSearchGeneral referencesWebSearch tool
WebFetchSpecific paper/page contentWebFetch tool

Loogle setup: Requires ~/tools/loogle with Mathlib index. Run loogle-server & for fast queries.

If no search tools available, proceed with caution and note "research phase skipped".

Checkpoints (automatic)

The workflow pauses for user input when:

  • ⚠️ Research finds obstacles
  • ❌ Testing finds counterexamples
  • 🔄 Implementation hits unfillable sorry after N attempts

Output Format

┌─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ ✓ MACHINE VERIFIED                                  │
│                                                     │
│ Theorem: ∀ φ : G →* H, φ(1_G) = 1_H                │
│                                                     │
│ Proof Strategy: Direct application of              │
│ MonoidHom.map_one from Mathlib.                    │
│                                                     │
│ Phases:                                             │
│   📚 Research: Found in Mathlib.Algebra.Group.Hom  │
│   🏗️ Design: Single lemma, no sorries needed       │
│   🧪 Test: N/A (trivial)                           │
│   ⚙️ Implement: 3 lines                            │
│   ✅ Verify: 0 custom axioms, 0 sorries            │
│                                                     │
│ File: proofs/group_hom_identity.lean               │
└─────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

What I Can Prove

DomainExamples
Category TheoryFunctors, natural transformations, Yoneda
Abstract AlgebraGroups, rings, homomorphisms
TopologyContinuity, compactness, connectedness
AnalysisLimits, derivatives, integrals
LogicPropositional, first-order

Limitations

  • Complex proofs may take multiple iterations
  • Novel research-level proofs may exceed capabilities
  • Some statements are unprovable over ℚ (need ℝ extension)

Behind The Scenes

  • Lean 4.26.0 - Theorem prover
  • Mathlib - 100K+ formalized theorems
  • Godel-Prover - AI tactic suggestions (via LMStudio)
  • Compiler-in-the-loop - Automatic verification on every write
  • Research tools - Nia, Perplexity, WebSearch (graceful degradation)

See Also

  • /loogle-search - Search Mathlib by type signature (used in Phase 1 RESEARCH)
  • /math-router - For computation (integrals, equations)
  • /lean4 - Direct Lean syntax access

スコア

総合スコア

95/100

リポジトリの品質指標に基づく評価

SKILL.md

SKILL.mdファイルが含まれている

+20
LICENSE

ライセンスが設定されている

+10
説明文

100文字以上の説明がある

+10
人気

GitHub Stars 1000以上

+15
最近の活動

3ヶ月以内に更新

+5
フォーク

10回以上フォークされている

+5
Issue管理

オープンIssueが50未満

+5
言語

プログラミング言語が設定されている

+5
タグ

1つ以上のタグが設定されている

+5

レビュー

💬

レビュー機能は近日公開予定です