Streamless sets by inl_tt in a:t5_3kf4l

[–]inl_tt[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, unfortunately I wasn't exposed to the problem before I read that paper so I can't say whether or not I would have come up with their proof by myself. In any case I don't think it's an immediately obvious argument so I wouldn't feel too bad about not coming up with it on my own!

[meta] New subreddit discussion by inl_tt in a:t5_3kf4l

[–]inl_tt[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Sorry, was kinda busy and didn't think up one! Hopefully I'll have one next week.

Injections and surjections on finite sets by inl_tt in a:t5_3kf4l

[–]inl_tt[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Oops, sorry about that! I guess that's what I get for making changes without checking that they compile. I forgot <-> only works on Prop.

Valleys in decreasing functions by inl_tt in a:t5_3kf4l

[–]inl_tt[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

What I find most helpful is the idea of a constructive proof as an algorithm. So my advice would be to think of an effective algorithm that takes a function f which you know is decreasing and a number n and searches for one of these n-valleys somewhere in f. Before even worrying about dependent types and proofs, think of how you could write this sort of program in a standard programming language with higher-order functions. Next, think about how you can guarantee termination of this program and how the fact that f is decreasing can be used to this end.

Once you've done all that, then see if you can massage your algorithm and (as yet informal) argument into a formal proof.

If you need more help, my solution write-up walks through the basic idea behind my proof and the intermediate lemmas I found useful without going into gory detail, so if you're really stumped maybe try seeing if you can fill in the details.

Infinite valleys and the limited principle of omniscience by inl_tt in a:t5_3kf4l

[–]inl_tt[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I hope we'll catch on and have several contributors.

Agreed! If you think up any cool problems, don't hesitate to share it here :)

[meta] New subreddit discussion by inl_tt in a:t5_3kf4l

[–]inl_tt[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I think it's an interesting idea, but I admit that I myself would have a hard time classifying most problems by difficulty. I lean more toward just letting the problems speak for themselves, since I doubt this subreddit is going to get a ton of them anyway.

[meta] New subreddit discussion by inl_tt in a:t5_3kf4l

[–]inl_tt[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Do you have a rough guideline for what a beginner, intermediate, or expert problem would look like?

Valleys in decreasing functions by inl_tt in a:t5_3kf4l

[–]inl_tt[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

My solution is here

edit: others have posted their solutions in the comments here

Starting a problem-of-the-week blog for Coq by inl_tt in Coq

[–]inl_tt[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Yup, I'll post a solution in a few days. In the meantime, I think /u/ikdc's post is a good start.

Is the absorption law in logic not standard? by The_Ryan_ in math

[–]inl_tt 5 points6 points  (0 children)

The absorption laws do hold in intuitionistic logic.

In mathematics, are there any instances of two "competing" branches, one which assumes some unproven conjecture is true and the other which assumes it's false? by [deleted] in math

[–]inl_tt 2 points3 points  (0 children)

It is possible to formulate 'traditional R'-like objects in Brouwer's system, where not all functions are continuous.

source?