Argumentation Theory for Mathematical Argument

Joseph Corneli, Ursula Martin, Dave Murray-Rust, Gabriela Rino Nesin, Alison Pease

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)
171 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

To adequately model mathematical arguments the analyst must be able to represent the mathematical objects under discussion and the relationships between them, as well as inferences drawn about these objects and relationships as the discourse unfolds. We introduce a framework with these properties, which has been used to analyse mathematical dialogues and expository texts. The framework can recover salient elements of discourse at, and within, the sentence level, as well as the way mathematical content connects to form larger argumentative structures. We show how the framework might be used to support computational reasoning, and argue that it provides a more natural way to examine the process of proving theorems than do Lamport’s structured proofs.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)173-214
Number of pages42
JournalArgumentation
Volume33
Issue number2
Early online date4 Jan 2019
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Jun 2019

    Fingerprint

Keywords

  • Inference Anchoring Theory
  • Mathematical argument
  • Mathematical practice
  • Structured proof

Cite this

Corneli, J., Martin, U., Murray-Rust, D., Rino Nesin, G., & Pease, A. (2019). Argumentation Theory for Mathematical Argument. Argumentation, 33(2), 173-214. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10503-018-9474-x