Paper detail

Check Your (Students') Proofs-With Holes

Cyp (Check Your Proofs) (Durner and Noschinski 2013; Traytel 2019) verifies proofs about Haskell-like programs. We extended Cyp with a pattern matcher for programs and proof terms, and a type checker. This allows to use Cyp for auto-grading exercises where the goal is to complete programs and proofs that are partially given by the instructor, as terms with holes. Since this allows holes in programs, type-checking becomes essential. Before, Cyp assumed that the program was written by a type-correct instructor, and therefore omitted type-checking of proofs. Cyp gracefully handles incomplete student submissions. It accepts holes temporarily, and checks complete subtrees fully. We present basic design decisions, make some remarks on implementation, and include example exercises from a recent course that used Cyp as part of the Leipzig Autotool auto-grading system.

preprint2020arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.