| name | proof-obligation-and-assumption-audit |
| description | Use when checking mathematical paper results for assumptions, quantifiers, domains, dependency fit, edge cases, external theorem use, proof coverage, or theorem-to-claim consistency. |
Proof Obligation And Assumption Audit
Audit whether a mathematical result is supported by its stated assumptions,
dependencies, and proof coverage. This is a writing review, not automated
theorem proving: it identifies obligations and risks that paper prose must not
hide.
Inputs
- Theorem, proposition, lemma, corollary, algorithm guarantee, or experiment
claim under review.
- Proof sketch or proof text, definitions, notation ledger, cited external
results, and relevant source notes.
- Optional venue standards or reviewer comments.
If proof material is unavailable, mark the result provisional instead of
rewriting it as proved.
Output Contract
Return a proof-obligation table with:
| Field | Meaning |
|---|
result | The theorem, lemma, proposition, or claim under review |
assumptions | Quantifiers, domains, regularity, constraints, and boundary conditions |
dependencies | Definitions, previous results, external theorems, experiments, or algorithms used |
obligation | What the proof must establish or verify |
coverage | covered, partial, missing, conflicting, or unclear |
risk | Meaning-preserving issue, missing case, overclaim, citation-fit risk, or notation risk |
action | Keep, soften, split, add assumption, cite precisely, prove, verify, or ask human |
Workflow
- Restate the result with all quantifiers, domains, and assumptions visible.
- List proof obligations: existence, uniqueness, invariance, convergence,
optimality, bounds, limiting cases, case splits, and dependency conditions.
- Check every cited external theorem against its original assumptions and
conclusion strength when sources are available.
- Compare proof coverage to obligations; mark missing or partial cases without
patching the mathematics.
- Suggest wording changes only when they preserve the verified mathematical
meaning.
Review Rules
- Do not strengthen a theorem to match the desired contribution.
- Do not weaken or drop assumptions without checking proof dependencies.
- Keep empirical evidence, heuristic arguments, conjectures, and formal proof
status separate.
- Route notation conflicts to
notation-and-variable-consistency before making
semantic judgments that depend on symbols or dimensions.