On Exams with the Isabelle Proof Assistant

Jacobsen, Frederik Krogsdal; Villadsen, Jørgen

doi:10.4204/eptcs.375.6

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 13 publications

(11 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Apart from the sequences, entry points are specified to allow for reentering the correct proof, which allows for a fair distribution of points even when some mistakes were made. An alternative to such block-based automatic proof grading is using a theorem prover [12,10]. For instance, Kappelmann et al employed Check Your Proof (CYP) 1 in an FP exam [12].…”

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Computer Aided Design and Grading for an Electronic Functional Programming Exam

Lübke,

Fuger,

Bahnsen

et al. 2023

Electron. Proc. Theor. Comput. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Electronic exams (e-exams) have the potential to substantially reduce the effort required for conducting an exam through automation. Yet, care must be taken to sacrifice neither task complexity nor constructive alignment nor grading fairness in favor of automation. To advance automation in the design and fair grading of (functional programming) e-exams, we introduce the following: A novel algorithm to check Proof Puzzles based on finding correct sequences of proof lines that improves fairness compared to an existing, edit distance-based algorithm; an open-source static analysis tool to check source code for task relevant features by traversing the abstract syntax tree; a higher-level language and open-source tool to specify regular expressions that makes creating complex regular expressions less error-prone. Our findings are embedded in a complete experience report on transforming a paper exam to an e-exam. We evaluated the resulting e-exam by analyzing the degree of automation in the grading process, asking students for their opinion, and critically reviewing our own experiences. Almost all tasks can be graded automatically at least in part (correct solutions can almost always be detected as such), the students agree that an e-exam is a fitting examination format for the course but are split on how well they can express their thoughts compared to a paper exam, and examiners enjoy a more time-efficient grading process while the point distribution in the exam results was almost exactly the same compared to a paper exam.

show abstract

Section: Related Workmentioning

confidence: 99%

Computer Aided Design and Grading for an Electronic Functional Programming Exam

Lübke,

Fuger,

Bahnsen

et al. 2023

Electron. Proc. Theor. Comput. Sci.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Teaching Higher-Order Logic Using Isabelle

Lund,

Villadsen

2024

Electron. Proc. Theor. Comput. Sci.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We present a formalization of higher-order logic in the Isabelle proof assistant, building directly on the foundational framework Isabelle/Pure and developed to be as small and readable as possible. It should therefore serve as a good introduction for someone looking into learning about higherorder logic and proof assistants, without having to study the much more complex Isabelle/HOL with heavier automation. To showcase our development and approach we explain a sample proof, describe the axioms and rules of our higher-order logic, and discuss our experience with teaching the subject in a classroom setting.

show abstract

On Exams with the Isabelle Proof Assistant

Cited by 2 publications

References 13 publications

Computer Aided Design and Grading for an Electronic Functional Programming Exam

Computer Aided Design and Grading for an Electronic Functional Programming Exam

Teaching Higher-Order Logic Using Isabelle

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About