Understanding Primes: The Role of Representation.

97 citations recorded by the source corpus.

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Transitions and Proof and Proving at Tertiary Level (2011, background): “Zazkis and Liljedahl (2004) have argued that the lack of an (easily manipulated) symbolic representation makes understanding prime numbers especially difficult, in particular, for preservice teachers.”
Every unsuccessful problem solver is unsuccessful in his or her own way: affective and cognitive factors in proving (2009, methodology): “This representation is transparent, in the sense already used by Zazkis and Liljedahl (2004) for prime numbers: it "has no more and no less meaning than the represented idea(s) or structure(s)" (p.”
What makes a counterexample exemplary? (2008, background): “terminology, “prime numbers under multiplication aren’t a closed set.” Following the request to describe in what way 2, 3 or 5 are different from 19, she alludes to her initial belief that the number 437 is prime because “you can’t divide it by 2, 3 or 5.” It was described in prior research that, in”
What Do We Mean by Mathematical Proof (2011, background): “These are meant to serve as examples of proofs that might be written, or accepted as “convincing,” by individuals with different proof schemes.”