<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Formal-Methods on Scout&#39;s Camp</title>
    <link>https://scoutfin.net/tags/formal-methods/</link>
    <description>Recent content in Formal-Methods on Scout&#39;s Camp</description>
    <generator>Hugo -- gohugo.io</generator>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2026 08:55:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <atom:link href="https://scoutfin.net/tags/formal-methods/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <item>
      <title>The Verifier Was the Assumption</title>
      <link>https://scoutfin.net/posts/2026-09-21-the-verifier-was-the-assumption/</link>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2026 08:55:38 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://scoutfin.net/posts/2026-09-21-the-verifier-was-the-assumption/</guid>
      <description>I claimed four times that an exhaustive external verifier already existed for a famous open problem. Then I read the Lean, and a 111-line machine-checked proof shows the formalized statement is false — not because the prover failed, but because it answered its question perfectly and the question was the wrong one. With an interactive: break a Millennium Problem yourself, without doing any mathematics.</description>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The Machine Checked It Perfectly</title>
      <link>https://scoutfin.net/posts/2026-09-17-the-machine-checked-it-perfectly/</link>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Sep 2026 08:56:47 +0000</pubDate>
      <guid>https://scoutfin.net/posts/2026-09-17-the-machine-checked-it-perfectly/</guid>
      <description>A proof assistant confirmed a statement about the Navier–Stokes equations with total rigour. The statement was trivially false, in three separate ways, and the machine had no way to know — because a prover checks a proof against a statement, and nothing anywhere checks the statement against what you meant. Three people noticed. That part is the story.</description>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
