Proof styles in multimodal reasoning

Jon Oberlander, Richard Cox, Keith Stenning

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceedingChapter (peer-reviewed)peer-review

Abstract

This paper is as follows: We introduce Hyperproof, and then study two cases of proofs constructed in Hyperproof. The two students addressed the same problem, but we observe a number of significant differences in the way they solved it. We then discuss the experimental regime under which these proofs were gathered; we focus on our finding that there is a robust distinction between subjects who are more or less successful on an independent task, whose solution can involve the use of external representations (such as tables). We then return to properties we noted in the case studies, and show how their patterns of rule use and proof structure reflect systematic differences between the two classes of subjects. We conclude by suggesting how these patterns might be explained by the `specificity hypothesis' we have developed in earlier work.
Original languageEnglish
Title of host publicationLogic, Language and Computation
EditorsJerry Seligman, Dag Westerståhl
PublisherCSLI Publications
Pages403-414
Number of pages12
Volume1
ISBN (Print)188-1526-895, 188-1526-909
Publication statusPublished - 19 Mar 1996

Keywords

  • proof style
  • multimodal reasoning
  • significant difference
  • external representation
  • systematic difference
  • experimental regime
  • robust distinction
  • independent task
  • case study
  • proof structure
  • rule use
  • specificity hypothesis

Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'Proof styles in multimodal reasoning'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this