THedu'11: May 6 deadline extension for ext.abstracts

[Walther Neuper]

----------------------------------------------------------------------
              DEADLINE EXTENSION   6.May   FOR EXTENDED ABSTRACTS
----------------------------------------------------------------------
                                  THedu'11
                   CTP components for educational software
                   =======================================
                      (CTP -- Computer Theorem Proving)
                     http://www.uc.pt/en/congressos/thedu

                             Workshop at CADE-23,
             23nd International Conference on Automated Deduction
                   Wroclaw, Poland, July 31- August 5, 2011
                         http://cade23.ii.uni.wroc.pl/
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Important Dates
---------------
     * Extended Abstracts/Demo proposals  6 May 2011 (PDF, easychair [2])
     * Author Notification:               3 Jun 2011
     * Worshop Day:                      31 Jul 2011
     * Full papers (post-proceedings):   27 Aug 2011 (LaTeX,easychair[2])

THedu'11 Scope
--------------
This workshop intends to gather the research communities for Computer 
Theorem proving (CTP), Automated Theorem Proving (ATP),  Interactive 
Theorem Proving (ITP) as well as for Computer Algebra Systems (CAS) and 
Dynamic Geometry Systems (DGS).
The goal of this union is to combine and focus systems of these areas 
and to enhance existing educational software as well as studying the 
design of the next generation of mechanised mathematics assistants 
(MMA). Elements for next-generation MMA's include:

     * Declarative Languages for Problem Solution: education in applied 
sciences and in engineering is mainly concerned with problems, which are 
understood as operations on elementary objects to be transformed to an 
object representing a problem solution. Preconditions and postconditions 
of these operations can be used to describe the possible steps in the 
problem space; thus, ATP-systems can be used to check if an operation 
sequence given by the user does actually present a problem solution. 
Such "Problem Solution Languages" encompass declarative proof languages 
like Isabelle/Isar or Coq's Mathematical Proof Language, but also more 
specialized forms such as, for example, geometric problem solution 
languages that express a proof argument in Euclidean Geometry or 
languages for graph theory.

     * Consistent Mathematical Content Representation:  libraries of 
existing ITP-Systems, in particular those following the LCF-prover 
paradigm, usually provide logically coherent and human readable 
knowledge. In the leading provers, mathematical knowledge is covered to 
an extent beyond most courses in applied sciences. However, the 
potential of this mechanised knowledge for education is clearly not yet 
recognised adequately: renewed pedagogy calls for enquiry-based learning 
from concrete to abstract --- and the knowledge's logical coherence 
supports such learning: for instance, the formula 2.pi depends on the 
definition of reals and of multiplication; close to these definitions 
are the laws like commutativity etc. Clearly, the complexity of the 
knowledge's traceable interrelations poses a challenge to usability design.

     * User-Guidance in Stepwise Problem Solving: Such guidance is 
indispensable for independent learning, but costly to implement so far, 
because so many special cases need to be coded by hand. However, CTP 
technology makes automated generation of user-guidance reachable: 
declarative languages as mentioned above, novel programming languages 
combining computation and deduction, methods for automated construction 
with ruler and compass from specifications, etc --- all these methods 
'know how to solve a problem'; so, using the methods' knowledge to 
generate user-guidance mechanically is an appealing challenge for ATP 
and ITP, and probably for compiler construction!

In principle, mathematical software can be conceived as models of 
mathematics: The challenge addressed by this workshop is to provide 
appealing models for MMAs which are interactive and which explain 
themselves such that interested students can independently learn by 
inquiry and experimentation.

Program Chairs
--------------
     Ralph-Johan Back, Abo University, Turku, Finland
     Pedro Quaresma, University of Coimbra, Portugal

Program Committee
     Francisco Botana, University of Vigo at Pontevedra, Spain
     Florian Haftmann, Munich University of Technology, Germany
     Predrag Janicic, University of Belgrade, Serbia
     Cezary Kaliszyk, University of Tsukuba, Japan
     Julien Narboux, University of Strasbourg, France
     Walther Neuper, Graz University of Technology, Austria
     Wolfgang Schreiner, Johannes Kepler University, Linz, Austria
     Laurent Théry, Sophia Antipolis, INRIA, France
     Makarius Wenzel, University Paris-Sud, France
     Burkhart Wolff, University Paris-Sud, France

Submission
----------
THedu'11 seeks papers and demos presenting original unpublished work 
which is not been submitted for publication elsewhere.

Both, papers and demos, are submitted as extended abstracts first (29 
Apr 2011), which must not exceed five pages. The abstract should be new 
material. Demos should be accompanied by links to demos/downloads and 
[existing] system descriptions. Availability of such accompanying 
material will be a strong prerequisite for acceptance.

The authors of the extended abstracts and system descriptions should 
submit to easychair [2] in PDF format generated by EPTCS LaTeX style [3] 
. Selected extended abstracts and system descriptions will appear in 
CISUC Technical Report series (ISSN 0874-338X, [1]).

At least one author of each accepted paper/demo is expected to attend 
THedu'11 and to present her or his paper/demo, and the extended 
abstracts will be made available online.

After presentation at the conference selected authors will be invited to 
submit a substantially revised version, extended to 10-14 pages, for 
publication by the Electronic Proceedings in Theoretical Computer 
Science (EPTCS). Papers/system descriptions will be reviewed by blind 
peer review and evaluated by three referees with respect to relevance, 
clarity, quality, originality, and impact.

Revised versions are submitted in LaTeX according to the EPTCS style 
guidelines [3] via easychair [2].

[1] http://www.uc.pt/en/fctuc/ID/cisuc/RecentPublications/Techreports/
[2] http://www.easychair.org/conferences/?conf=thedu11
[3] http://www.cse.unsw.edu.au/%7Ervg/EPTCS/eptcsstyle.zip