claude-bot
04d827b3b3
Restructures the textbook pipeline around the distinction the body-derived dataset had been blurring: a bench should be actual unsolved problems, and a reusable premise library should only ever contain statements that have really been proven, the way Mathlib itself works. - library_candidates/goodman-1.6.jsonl (renamed from datasets/goodman-1.6.jsonl): the book's own Theorem/Proposition/Lemma/Corollary claims from the main text. Not bench targets -- premises waiting to be proven once via a real lean-bench run, then assembled into the reusable library by build_library.py (which already only keeps success:true entries with their checked proof, unchanged by this commit). - datasets/goodman-1.6-exercises.jsonl (new): the actual bench, sourced from the book's Exercises 1.6 block via two new scripts, textbook/extract_exercises.py (slices the Exercises block, lists its numbered items, drops a known false-positive class where a wrapped cross-reference like "...Proposition\n1.6.19." looks like a real exercise heading) and textbook/formalize_exercises.py (LLM step, given both the exercises and body text together since many exercises say "Prove Proposition N.N.N" instead of restating the claim). - Both formalize.py and formalize_exercises.py's validate() now enforce that every checklist item is covered by at least one output entry (included or explicitly excluded with a reason); formalize_exercises.py did not have this yet and a first real run silently dropped 7 of 15 checklist items with no trace before this was added. - All 12 model-produced exercise entries needed real fixes before commit, the same review pass applied to the body pilot: 3 exercises literally ask to prove an already-stated body claim (Exercise 1.6.1 -> Proposition 1.6.7, 1.6.2 -> Proposition 1.6.9, 1.6.7 -> Proposition 1.6.18, 1.6.9 -> Corollary 1.6.20, 1.6.15 -> Lemma 1.6.26) and now reuse that claim's own already-checked statement verbatim instead of an independently re-derived (and in one case strictly weaker) restatement; two entries (1.6.2, 1.6.11) had literal math prose like "I(m, n)" or "gcd(n1,...,nk)" leaked into the statement field, which is not valid Lean; several had untyped/ambiguous gcd or Prime usage fixed the same way the earlier body fixes were (Nat.Prime, IsCoprime, explicit casts, IsGreatest instead of max on a Set); and Exercise 1.6.12 part (a) turned out to be a discussion question whose unconditional-identity reading is actually false (6, 10, 15 are jointly coprime but not pairwise coprime), so it was moved to the excluded file with a reason instead of committed as a false theorem. - Definitions can now be real, compiled Lean, not only JSON metadata: Definition 1.6.22 (gcd of a list of integers, previously a null placeholder since no single Mathlib constant matches it) now has a real hand-written `def IsGCDOfList`, and textbook/build_definitions.py compiles any manifest's non-null lean_code entries into lib/Definitions.lean. goodman-1-6-24 (library) and the new goodman-1-6-ex-11-b/c, goodman-1-6-ex-12 (bench) all now use IsGCDOfList instead of repeating an inline existential. - textbook/README.md rewritten around the two-track design and records how this is meant to connect to lean-agent's eventual goal-directed proof search against the growing library (not yet built). - New tests for extract_exercises.py and build_definitions.py; full local suite still green (18/19, the one failure is the pre-existing, unrelated lean_agent import error in test_dataset.py). Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 5 <noreply@anthropic.com> Claude-Session: https://claude.ai/code/session_017vbLFFJiHSZqGZHEkjvG5x
5 lines
2.4 KiB
JSON
5 lines
2.4 KiB
JSON
{"id": "goodman-1-6-ex-4", "source_label": "Exercise 1.6.4", "kind": "exercise", "statement": "gcd 60 8 = 4 ∧ 4 = 60 * a + 8 * b ∧ gcd 32242 42 = 2 ∧ 2 = 32242 * c + 42 * d", "prelude": "import Mathlib.Data.Int.GCD", "natural_language": "Compute the greatest common divisor of (a) 60 and 8, and (b) 32242 and 42, and express each as an integer linear combination of the given numbers.", "requires": ["Mathlib.Data.Int.GCD"], "references": [], "include_in_bench": false, "exclude_reason": "Specific numeric computation"}
|
|
{"id": "goodman-1-6-ex-10", "source_label": "Exercise 1.6.10", "kind": "exercise", "statement": "Write a program in your favorite programming language to compute the greatest common divisor of two nonzero integers, using the approach of repeated division with remainders. Get your program to explicitly give the greatest common divisor as an integer linear combination of the given nonzero integers. Compare this method with the method of computing the prime factorizations of the two integers and taking the largest collection of prime factors common to the two factorizations in terms of computational efficiency.", "prelude": "", "natural_language": "Write a program to compute the GCD of two integers and compare it with the prime factorization method.", "requires": [], "references": [], "include_in_bench": false, "exclude_reason": "Programming task and discussion question"}
|
|
{"id": "goodman-1-6-ex-13", "source_label": "Exercise 1.6.13", "kind": "exercise", "statement": "(a) Develop an algorithm to compute gcd(n₁, n₂, ..., nₖ). (b) Develop a computer program to compute the greatest common divisor of any finite collection of nonzero integers.", "prelude": "", "natural_language": "(a) Develop an algorithm to compute the GCD of n₁, n₂, ..., nₖ. (b) Develop a computer program to compute the GCD of any finite collection of nonzero integers.", "requires": [], "references": [], "include_in_bench": false, "exclude_reason": "Algorithm and programming task"}
|
|
{"id": "goodman-1-6-ex-12-a", "source_label": "Exercise 1.6.12(a)", "kind": "exercise", "statement": "N/A", "prelude": "import Mathlib", "natural_language": "Whether relatively prime implies pairwise relatively prime for more than two integers.", "requires": [], "references": [], "include_in_bench": false, "exclude_reason": "Discussion/judgment question, not a fixed claim; and taken as an unconditional identity it is false in general (e.g. 6, 10, 15 are jointly coprime but not pairwise coprime)."}
|