Isabelle VS Coq

Compare Isabelle VS Coq and see what are their differences

Contents:

» Base Details
» Videos
» Reviews
» Alternatives

Isabelle

Isabelle is a proof assistant for writing and checking mathematical proofs by computer.

Coq

Coq is a proof assistant, which allows you to write mathematical proofs in a rigorous and formal...

Landing page //
2023-04-29

Landing page //
2022-04-17

Isabelle

Website: cl.cam.ac.uk
$ Details: -

Edit details

Coq

Website: coq.inria.fr
$ Details

Edit details

Isabelle features and specs

No features have been listed yet.

Coq features and specs

Formal Verification
Coq provides a powerful system for formal verification, allowing users to prove the correctness of algorithms and software with mathematical precision.
Rich Type System
Coq's dependent type system enables expressive and flexible programming, allowing types to depend on values and offering advanced type safety.
Proof Assistance
Coq includes an interactive proof assistant that helps in constructing formal proofs, making it easier to verify complex mathematical and computational concepts.
Wide Range of Applications
Coq is used in various fields such as mathematics, computer science, and industry for the development of certified programs and formalized mathematics.

Possible disadvantages of Coq

Steep Learning Curve
Due to its complexity and the level of abstraction, Coq can be challenging for beginners to learn and use effectively without substantial training.
Limited Automation
While Coq provides tools for automating some proof steps, a significant portion of proofs may still require manual intervention and human insight.
Performance Constraints
The requirement to construct proofs can lead to performance trade-offs, making Coq less efficient for some computational tasks compared to other tools.
Niche Community
Coq has a specialized user community, which might make finding learning resources, collaborators, or support more challenging compared to more mainstream programming languages.

Isabelle videos

+ Add

NEW ISABELLE Skin! Reactive Test | Gameplay + Combos | Before You Buy (Fortnite Battle Royale)

Coq videos

+ Add

Ubiquinol CoQ-10 Supplement Review

Category Popularity

0-100% (relative to Isabelle and Coq)

Coq

Programming Language

22 22%

Programming Language

78% 78

OOP

24 24%

OOP

76% 76

Generic Programming Language

33 33%

Generic Programming Language

67% 67

Technical Computing

100 100%

Technical Computing

0% 0

User comments

Share your experience with using Isabelle and Coq. For example, how are they different and which one is better?

Social recommendations and mentions

Based on our record, Coq seems to be more popular. It has been mentiond 46 times since March 2021. We are tracking product recommendations and mentions on various public social media platforms and blogs. They can help you identify which product is more popular and what people think of it.

Isabelle mentions (0)

We have not tracked any mentions of Isabelle yet. Tracking of Isabelle recommendations started around Mar 2021.

Coq mentions (46)

The First Stable Release of a Rust-Rewrite Sudo Implementation
Are those more important than, say: - Proven with Coq, a formal proof management system: https://coq.inria.fr/ See in the real world: https://aws.amazon.com/security/provable-security/ And check out Computer-Aided Verification (CAV). - Source: Hacker News / over 1 year ago
In Which I Claim Rich Hickey Is Wrong
Dafny and Whiley are two examples with explicit verification support. Idris and other dependently typed languages should all be rich enough to express the required predicate but might not necessarily be able to accept a reasonable implementation as proof. Isabelle, Lean, Coq, and other theorem provers definitely can express the capability but aren't going to churn out much in the way of executable programs;... - Source: Hacker News / almost 2 years ago
If given a list of properties/definitions and relationship between them, could a machine come up with (mostly senseless, but) true implications?
Still, there are many useful tools based on these ideas, used by programmers and mathematicians alike. What you describe sounds rather like Datalog (e.g. Soufflé Datalog), where you supply some rules and an initial fact, and the system repeatedly expands out the set of facts until nothing new can be derived. (This has to be finite, if you want to get anywhere.) In Prolog (e.g. SWI Prolog) you also supply a set of... Source: almost 2 years ago
Mark Petruska has requested 250000 Algos for the development of a Coq-avm library for AVM version 8
Information about the Coq proof assistant: https://coq.inria.fr/ , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coq. Source: almost 2 years ago
Basic SAT model of x86 instructions using Z3, autogenerated from Intel docs
This type of thing can help you formally verify code. So, if your proof is correct, and your description of the (language/CPU) is correct, you can prove the code does what you think it does. Formal proof systems are still growing up, though, and they are still pretty hard to use. See Coq for an introduction: https://coq.inria.fr/. - Source: Hacker News / almost 2 years ago