Upcoming Events
-
Oct
5
NSF GRFP Awardee Panel (Virtual)10:00am
NSF GRFP Awardee Panel (Virtual)
Wednesday, October 5th, 2022
10:00 AM - 11:00 AM
Other WebEx
Attention graduate (1st and 2nd year PhD, Master's considering the PhD) students and undergraduate seniors! Come learn about the NSF GRFP and receive helpful tips on applying. Get your questions answered from a panel of award recipients.
Important Notes: Eligibility for this award requires U.S. Citizenship or Permanent Residency; for more information about NSF GRFP please visit: https://www.nsfgrfp.org/.
Meeting information:
Join from the meeting link
https://uconn-cmr.webex.com/uconn-cmr/j.php?MTID=mbc1bd62c05ac9d935e63e41f9cab5d54
Join by meeting number
Meeting number (access code): 2622 728 5403
Meeting password: JqD5AnZ6a7m
Tap to join from a mobile device (attendees only)
+1-415-655-0002,,26227285403## US Toll
Join by phone
+1-415-655-0002 US Toll
Global call-in numbers
Join from a video system or application
Dial 26227285403@uconn-cmr.webex.com
You can also dial 173.243.2.68 and enter your meeting number. -
Oct
6
Social Epistemology Working Group: Lauren Leydon-Hardy (Amherst)2:00pm
-
Oct
7
Logic Colloquium: Zoe Ashton (OSU)11:15am
Logic Colloquium: Zoe Ashton (OSU)
Friday, October 7th, 2022
11:15 AM - 12:45 PM
Storrs Campus, Storrs Campus Hybrid: ITE 336 & Zoom
Join us in the Logic Colloquium!
Zoe Ashton (OSU)
"How the Standard View of Rigor and the Standard Practice of Mathematics Clash"
Mathematical proofs are rigorous – it’s part of what distinguishes proofs from other argument types. But the quality of rigor, relatively simple for the trained mathematician to spot, is difficult to explicate. The most common view, often referred to as the standard view of rigor, is that “a mathematical proof is rigorous iff it can be converted into a formal derivation” (Burgess & De Toffoli (2022)). Each proponent of the standard view interprets “conversion” differently. For some, like Hamami (2022), conversion means algorithmic translation while others, like Burgess (2015), interpret it as just revealing enough steps of the formal derivation.
In this talk, I aim to present an overarching concern for the standard view. I’ll argue that no extant version of the standard view makes sense of how mathematicians make rigor judgments. Both Hamami (2022) and Tatton-Brown (2021) have both attempted to account for mathematicians’ rigor judgments using the standard view. I’ll argue that both still fail to adequately account for mathematical practice by positing that mathematicians engage in either algorithmic proof search and/or extensive training in formal rigor.
We seem to be left with two options: continue trying to amend the standard view or introduce a new account of rigor which is practice-focused. I’ll argue that issues with the two accounts are general issues that will likely occur for future formulations of the standard view. Thus, we should aim to introduce a new account of informal, mathematical rigor. I’ll close by sketching a new account of rigor related to the audience-based view of proof introduced in Ashton (2021).
https://logic.uconn.edu/calendar/ -
Oct
7
Geography Colloquium - UConn Environmental Corps12:15pm
