Geometrie-Beweis-Rechner
Ergebnisse
In-Depth Tutorial: Geometrie-Beweis-Rechner
A geometric proof is a step-by-step argument that demonstrates the truth of a statement using definitions, postulates, and previously-proven theorems. The Geometric Proofs Calculator takes a "given" and a "to prove" statement and produces a complete two-column proof — step, reason, step, reason — using whichever postulates and theorems apply. This tutorial explains the structure of a two-column proof, what counts as a valid reason, and the most common proof types you'll encounter in geometry.
The two-column proof format
The traditional format for high-school geometry proofs has two columns:
| Statement | Reason |
|---|---|
| 1. AB = CD | Given |
| 2. CD = EF | Given |
| 3. AB = EF | Transitive property of equality |
Every step must have a justification on the right side. Acceptable justifications:
- Given — stated in the problem
- Definition — by the definition of a term (e.g. "definition of midpoint")
- Postulate — a fundamental assumption that doesn't need proof (e.g. SSS Postulate)
- Theorem — a previously-proven statement (e.g. "Vertical Angles Theorem")
- Property — an algebraic property (reflexive, symmetric, transitive, substitution, distributive)
- CPCTC — Corresponding Parts of Congruent Triangles are Congruent (used after proving two triangles congruent)
How the calculator works
Behind the scenes, the calculator uses a large language model trained on thousands of geometry proofs. You provide:
- The given: what conditions you start from. Example: "AB = CD, BC = DE, ABCD is a quadrilateral".
- The to prove: the statement you want to demonstrate. Example: "Triangle ABE ≅ Triangle CDE".
- Optional: a figure photo. The AI Vision system can read both the diagram and any printed labels.
The AI:
- Parses the given conditions and goal.
- Identifies which theorem(s) connect them.
- Builds the chain of statements, citing each justification.
- Outputs the proof in two-column format (or paragraph form on request).
Standard proof types
Most introductory geometry proofs fall into one of these categories:
1. Triangle congruence proofs
Use one of the 5 congruence postulates (SSS, SAS, ASA, AAS, HL) to prove two triangles congruent. Then CPCTC to extract specific corresponding-part equalities.
Typical structure: identify shared elements (reflexive sides, vertical angles, alternate interior angles), match them up, invoke the postulate, conclude congruence.
2. Triangle similarity proofs
Use one of the 3 similarity postulates (AA, SSS-sim, SAS-sim) to show two triangles similar. Then use proportionality of corresponding sides to derive specific ratios.
3. Parallel-line angle proofs
Establish that two lines are parallel by showing one of the equivalent angle conditions (corresponding equal, alternate interior equal, co-interior supplementary). Or use already-parallel lines to derive equal angles.
4. Quadrilateral classification proofs
Show that a quadrilateral is a parallelogram, rhombus, rectangle, square, kite, or isosceles trapezoid by demonstrating its defining properties.
Example: "Prove ABCD is a parallelogram." Strategy: show both pairs of opposite sides parallel, OR both pairs of opposite sides equal, OR both pairs of opposite angles equal, OR diagonals bisect each other — any ONE of these is sufficient.
5. Circle theorem proofs
Inscribed-angle theorem, tangent-line properties, chord-and-arc relationships, cyclic-quadrilateral angle theorems.
6. Segment and angle proofs
Bisectors, midpoints, perpendiculars, angle additions/subtractions. Often use algebraic properties (substitution, transitive) alongside geometric ones.
What makes a proof "rigorous"
A proof is rigorous when every step is justified by a previously-established statement — no leaps of intuition, no "obviously this is true". Standard high-school geometry grading rubrics expect:
- Each step numbered.
- Each step justified by name (e.g. "Vertical Angles Theorem", not "obvious").
- The progression logical — each step follows from prior ones via the cited theorem/property.
- The final step matches the "to prove" exactly.
Worked example
Given: AB ∥ CD; AB = CD.
To Prove: △ABE ≅ △CDE (where E is the intersection of diagonals AC and BD).
| Statement | Reason |
|---|---|
| 1. AB ∥ CD | Given |
| 2. AB = CD | Given |
| 3. ∠ABE ≅ ∠CDE | Alternate interior angles (AB ∥ CD with transversal BD) |
| 4. ∠BAE ≅ ∠DCE | Alternate interior angles (AB ∥ CD with transversal AC) |
| 5. △ABE ≅ △CDE | ASA — Step 3, Step 2, Step 4 |
The proof is 5 lines, each justified, leading from the given to the conclusion.
Tips for writing proofs by hand
- Start with given, end with goal. Make sure step 1 cites a "given" and the last step matches "to prove" exactly.
- Identify shared elements early. A shared side or shared angle (reflexive) is often a free step that connects the two parts of your proof.
- Look for parallel lines. They give you many angle equalities "for free" via the parallel-line theorems.
- Don't skip steps. Even algebraically obvious steps like substitution need to be cited. "A = B, B = C, therefore A = C" is three steps, not one.
- Write CPCTC, not "corresponding parts". The standard acronym is universally accepted.
When to use AI vs do it by hand
The AI is fastest for:
- Verifying you've found a correct proof (compare your work to the AI's).
- Generating a proof when you're stuck and need a starting strategy.
- Translating a textbook proof from paragraph form to two-column form (or vice versa).
- Reading a problem off a photo and getting an instant proof.
Do it by hand when:
- It's graded work and the teacher requires it.
- You're studying for an exam (writing proofs by hand cements the patterns).
- The proof is short — for 3-line proofs, AI is overkill.
Limitations
- AI may cite the wrong theorem name. The reasoning is usually correct but the explicit name (e.g. "Vertical Angles Theorem" vs "Linear Pair Theorem") can be inconsistent. Read critically.
- Long multi-stage proofs may be summarized. A proof requiring 12+ steps may be compressed to 6-7. If you need every step, ask for "complete two-column proof, no summarized steps".
- Non-Euclidean geometry not supported. The AI assumes standard Euclidean axioms. Spherical / hyperbolic / projective geometry proofs are out of scope.
Häufig gestellte Fragen – Geometrie-Beweis-Rechner
Kongruenz von Dreiecken (SSS, SWS, WSW, WSW, HW), Ähnlichkeit von Dreiecken (WW, SWS, SSS), Beweisführung mit Parallelen und Winkeln, Klassifizierung von Vierecken (Parallelogramm, Raute, gleichschenkliges Trapez), Kreisbeweise und Beweise mit Winkel- und Streckenhalbierenden – alle Standardbeweise der Oberstufe und der einführenden Hochschulgeometrie.
Ja – standardmäßig wird jeder Schritt in Zweispaltform (Aussage | Begründung) zurückgegeben. Auf Wunsch kann derselbe Beweis auch als Fließtext oder als Flussdiagramm zur Visualisierung bereitgestellt werden.
Es analysiert die gegebenen Bedingungen und das Ziel, wählt dann den direktesten Weg – in der Regel unter Verwendung der kleinsten Anzahl von Axiomen und Sätzen – und benennt jeden Schritt (z. B. Scheitelwinkelsatz, SWS-Axiom, Satz von den Wechselwinkeln).
Ja – laden Sie ein Foto der Figur und des gedruckten Aufgabentexts über das Datei-Upload-Feld hoch. Das KI-Vision-System liest sowohl das Diagramm als auch den Text und erstellt daraus den vollständigen Beweis.
KI-Beweise sind bei Standardaufgaben in der Regel korrekt, können jedoch gelegentlich den falschen Satznamen angeben oder einen Begründungsschritt überspringen. Lesen Sie den Beweis immer kritisch – insbesondere bei benoteten Arbeiten – und verwenden Sie AI Solve als Ausgangspunkt, nicht als endgültige Antwort.
Jeder Beweis verbraucht 3 Credits, unabhängig davon, ob er nur textbasiert oder foto-basiert ist. Neue Konten erhalten 30 kostenlose Credits, ausreichend für 10 vollständige Beweise.