QED in Context: An Observation Study of Proof Assistant Users
Jessica Shi, Cassia Torczon, Harrison Goldstein, Benjamin C. Pierce, Andrew Head
Abstract
Interactive theorem provers, or proof assistants, are important tools across many areas of computer science and mathematics, but even experts find them challenging to use effectively. To improve their design, we need a deeper, user-centric understanding of proof assistant usage.
We present the results of an observation study of proof assistant users. We use contextual inquiry methodology, observing 30 participants doing their everyday work in Rocq and Lean. We qualitatively analyze their experiences to surface four observations: that proof writers iterate on their proofs by reacting to and incorporating feedback from the proof assistant; that proof progress often involves challenging conversations with the proof assistant; that proofs are constructed in consultation with a wide array of external resources; and that proof writers are guided by design considerations that go beyond "getting to QED. " Our documentation of these themes clarifies what proof assistant usage looks like currently and identifies potential opportunities that researchers should consider when working to improve the usability of proof assistants.
CCS Concepts: • Human-centered computing → Empirical studies in HCI; • Software and its engineering → Formal software verification.
Ask about this paper
Your agent reads all of it.
Lune indexed this paper to the last equation, along with the top-tier papers that cite it. Ask a question and the answer quotes them.
Your agent calls
Luneget_paper_fulltext
Free to start. No credit card required.
Terminal
Install the CLIlune papers fulltext 43ca9ff8-43a8-40f8-9bfe-0b1802526c76Cited by top-tier papers2
- Agentic Verification of Software SystemsHaoxin Tu, Huan Zhao, Yahui Song, Mehtab Zafar et al.FSE 2026 · 1 citation
- On the Impact of Formal Verification on Software DevelopmentEric Mugnier, Yuanyuan Zhou, Ranjit Jhala, Michael CoblenzOOPSLA 2025
Builds on6
- Grounded Copilot: How Programmers Interact with Code-Generating ModelsShraddha Barke, Michael B. James, Nadia PolikarpovaOOPSLA 2023 · 408 citations
- Baldur: Whole-Proof Generation and Repair with Large Language ModelsEmily First, Markus N. Rabe, Talia Ringer, Yuriy BrunFSE 2023 · 89 citations
- Property-Based Testing in PracticeHarrison Goldstein, Joseph W. Cutler, Daniel Dickstein, Benjamin C. Pierce et al.ICSE 2024 · 21 citations
- Proof repair across type equivalencesTalia Ringer, RanDair Porter, Nathaniel Yazdani, John Leo et al.PLDI 2021 · 20 citations
- How statically-typed functional programmers write codeJustin Lubin, Sarah E. ChasinsOOPSLA 2021 · 17 citations
Related papers
- Investigating How Computer Science Researchers Design Their Co-Writing Experiences With AIAlberto Monge Roffarello, Tommaso Calò, Luca Scibetta, Luigi De RussisCHI 2025 · 3 citations
- Synthesizing Implication Lemmas for Interactive Theorem ProvingAna Brendel, Aishwarya Sivaraman, Todd D. MillsteinOOPSLA 2025
- How Do Analysts Understand and Verify AI-Assisted Data Analyses?Ken Gu, Ruoxi Shang, Tim Althoff, Chenglong Wang et al.CHI 2024 · 36 citations
- Lean Finder: Semantic Search for Mathlib That Understands User IntentsJialin Lu, Kye Emond, Kaiyu Yang, Swarat Chaudhuri et al.ICLR 2026 · 10 citations
- ImProver: Agent-Based Automated Proof OptimizationRiyaz Ahuja, Jeremy Avigad, Prasad Tetali, Sean WelleckICLR 2025
