How Mathematicians Determine if an Argument Is a Valid Proof

• Autores: Keith Weber
• Localización: Journal for research in mathematics education, ISSN 0021-8251, Vol. 39, Nº 4, 2008, págs. 431-459
• Idioma: inglés
• DOI: 10.5951/jresematheduc.39.4.0431
• Texto completo no disponible (Saber más ...)
• Resumen

  • The purpose of this article is to investigate the mathematical practice of proof validation�that is, the act of determining whether an argument constitutes a valid proof. The results of a study with 8 mathematicians are reported. The mathematicians were observed as they read purported mathematical proofs and made judgments about their validity; they were then asked reflective interview questions about their validation processes and their views on proving. The results suggest that mathematicians use several different modes of reasoning in proof validation, including formal reasoning and the construction of rigorous proofs, informal deductive reasoning, and example-based reasoning.