+(* In this Chapter we shall develop a naif theory of sets represented as characteristic
+predicates over some universe \ 5code\ 6A\ 5/code\ 6, that is as objects of type A→Prop. *)
+include "basics/types.ma".
+include "basics/bool.ma".
-(**************************************************************************)
-(* ___ *)
-(* ||M|| *)
-(* ||A|| A project by Andrea Asperti *)
-(* ||T|| *)
-(* ||I|| Developers: *)
-(* ||T|| The HELM team. *)
-(* ||A|| http://helm.cs.unibo.it *)
-(* \ / *)
-(* \ / This file is distributed under the terms of the *)
-(* v GNU General Public License Version 2 *)
-(* *)
-(**************************************************************************)
-
-include "arithmetics/nat.ma".
-include "basics/lists/list.ma".
-include "basics/sets.ma".
-
-definition word ≝ λS:DeqSet.list S.
-
-notation "ϵ" non associative with precedence 90 for @{ 'epsilon }.
-interpretation "epsilon" 'epsilon = (nil ?).
-
-(* concatenation *)
-definition cat : ∀S,l1,l2,w.Prop ≝
- λS.λl1,l2.λw:word S.∃w1,w2.w1 @ w2 = w ∧ l1 w1 ∧ l2 w2.
-notation "a · b" non associative with precedence 60 for @{ 'middot $a $b}.
-interpretation "cat lang" 'middot a b = (cat ? a b).
-
-let rec flatten (S : DeqSet) (l : list (word S)) on l : word S ≝
-match l with [ nil ⇒ [ ] | cons w tl ⇒ w @ flatten ? tl ].
-
-let rec conjunct (S : DeqSet) (l : list (word S)) (r : word S → Prop) on l: Prop ≝
-match l with [ nil ⇒ True | cons w tl ⇒ r w ∧ conjunct ? tl r ].
-
-(* kleene's star *)
-definition star ≝ λS.λl.λw:word S.∃lw.flatten ? lw = w ∧ conjunct ? lw l.
-notation "a ^ *" non associative with precedence 90 for @{ 'star $a}.
-interpretation "star lang" 'star l = (star ? l).
-
-lemma cat_ext_l: ∀S.∀A,B,C:word S →Prop.
- A =1 C → A · B =1 C · B.
-#S #A #B #C #H #w % * #w1 * #w2 * * #eqw #inw1 #inw2
-cases (H w1) /6/
+(**** For instance the empty set is defined by the always function predicate *)
+
+definition empty_set ≝ λA:Type[0].λa:A.\ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/False.ind(1,0,0)"\ 6False\ 5/a\ 6.
+notation "\emptyv" non associative with precedence 90 for @{'empty_set}.
+interpretation "empty set" 'empty_set = (empty_set ?).
+
+(* Similarly, a singleton set contaning containing an element a, is defined
+by by the characteristic function asserting equality with a *)
+
+definition singleton ≝ λA.λx,a:A.x\ 5a title="leibnitz's equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 6a.
+(* notation "{x}" non associative with precedence 90 for @{'sing_lang $x}. *)
+interpretation "singleton" 'singl x = (singleton ? x).
+
+(* The membership relation between an element of type A and a set S:A →Prop is
+simply the predicate resulting from the application of S to a.
+The operations of union, intersection, complement and substraction
+are easily defined in terms of the propositional connectives of dijunction,
+conjunction and negation *)
+
+definition union : ∀A:Type[0].∀P,Q.A → Prop ≝ λA,P,Q,a.P a \ 5a title="logical or" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∨\ 5/a\ 6 Q a.
+interpretation "union" 'union a b = (union ? a b).
+
+definition intersection : ∀A:Type[0].∀P,Q.A→Prop ≝ λA,P,Q,a.P a \ 5a title="logical and" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∧\ 5/a\ 6 Q a.
+interpretation "intersection" 'intersects a b = (intersection ? a b).
+
+definition complement ≝ λU:Type[0].λA:U → Prop.λw.\ 5a title="logical not" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6¬\ 5/a\ 6 A w.
+interpretation "complement" 'not a = (complement ? a).
+
+definition substraction := λU:Type[0].λA,B:U → Prop.λw.A w \ 5a title="logical and" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∧\ 5/a\ 6 \ 5a title="logical not" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6¬\ 5/a\ 6 B w.
+interpretation "substraction" 'minus a b = (substraction ? a b).
+
+(* Finally, we use implication to define the inclusion relation between
+sets *)
+
+definition subset: ∀A:Type[0].∀P,Q:A→Prop.Prop ≝ λA,P,Q.∀a:A.(P a → Q a).
+interpretation "subset" 'subseteq a b = (subset ? a b).
+
+(* Two sets are equals if and only if they have the same elements, that is,
+if the two characteristic functions are extensionally equivalent: *)
+
+definition eqP ≝ λA:Type[0].λP,Q:A → Prop.∀a:A.P a \ 5a title="iff" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6↔\ 5/a\ 6 Q a.
+notation "A =1 B" non associative with precedence 45 for @{'eqP $A $B}.
+interpretation "extensional equality" 'eqP a b = (eqP ? a b).
+
+(* This notion of equality is different from the intensional equality of
+functions; the fact it defines an equivalence relation must be explicitly
+proved: *)
+
+lemma eqP_sym: ∀U.∀A,B:U →Prop.
+ A \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 B → B \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 A.
+#U #A #B #eqAB #a @\ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/iff_sym.def(2)"\ 6iff_sym\ 5/a\ 6 @eqAB qed.
+
+lemma eqP_trans: ∀U.∀A,B,C:U →Prop.
+ A \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 B → B \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 C → A \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 C.
+#U #A #B #C #eqAB #eqBC #a @\ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/iff_trans.def(2)"\ 6iff_trans\ 5/a\ 6 // qed.
+
+(* For the same reason, we must also prove that all the operations behave well
+with respect to eqP: *)
+
+lemma eqP_union_r: ∀U.∀A,B,C:U →Prop.
+ A \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 C → A \ 5a title="union" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∪\ 5/a\ 6 B \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 C \ 5a title="union" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∪\ 5/a\ 6 B.
+#U #A #B #C #eqAB #a @\ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/iff_or_r.def(2)"\ 6iff_or_r\ 5/a\ 6 @eqAB qed.
+
+lemma eqP_union_l: ∀U.∀A,B,C:U →Prop.
+ B \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 C → A \ 5a title="union" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∪\ 5/a\ 6 B \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 A \ 5a title="union" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∪\ 5/a\ 6 C.
+#U #A #B #C #eqBC #a @\ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/iff_or_l.def(2)"\ 6iff_or_l\ 5/a\ 6 @eqBC qed.
+
+lemma eqP_intersect_r: ∀U.∀A,B,C:U →Prop.
+ A \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 C → A \ 5a title="intersection" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∩\ 5/a\ 6 B \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 C \ 5a title="intersection" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∩\ 5/a\ 6 B.
+#U #A #B #C #eqAB #a @\ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/iff_and_r.def(2)"\ 6iff_and_r\ 5/a\ 6 @eqAB qed.
+
+lemma eqP_intersect_l: ∀U.∀A,B,C:U →Prop.
+ B \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 C → A \ 5a title="intersection" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∩\ 5/a\ 6 B \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 A \ 5a title="intersection" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∩\ 5/a\ 6 C.
+#U #A #B #C #eqBC #a @\ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/iff_and_l.def(2)"\ 6iff_and_l\ 5/a\ 6 @eqBC qed.
+
+lemma eqP_substract_r: ∀U.∀A,B,C:U →Prop.
+ A \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 C → A \ 5a title="substraction" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6-\ 5/a\ 6 B \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 C \ 5a title="substraction" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6-\ 5/a\ 6 B.
+#U #A #B #C #eqAB #a @\ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/iff_and_r.def(2)"\ 6iff_and_r\ 5/a\ 6 @eqAB qed.
+
+lemma eqP_substract_l: ∀U.∀A,B,C:U →Prop.
+ B \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 C → A \ 5a title="substraction" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6-\ 5/a\ 6 B \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 A \ 5a title="substraction" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6-\ 5/a\ 6 C.
+#U #A #B #C #eqBC #a @\ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/iff_and_l.def(2)"\ 6iff_and_l\ 5/a\ 6 /\ 5span class="autotactic"\ 62\ 5span class="autotrace"\ 6 trace \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/iff_not.def(4)"\ 6iff_not\ 5/a\ 6\ 5/span\ 6\ 5/span\ 6/ qed.
+
+(* We can now prove several properties of the previous set-theoretic operations.
+In particular, union is commutative and associative, and the empty set is an
+identity element: *)
+
+lemma union_empty_r: ∀U.∀A:U→Prop.
+ A \ 5a title="union" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∪\ 5/a\ 6 \ 5a title="empty set" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∅\ 5/a\ 6 \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 A.
+#U #A #w % [* // normalize #abs @\ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/False_ind.fix(0,1,1)"\ 6False_ind\ 5/a\ 6 /\ 5span class="autotactic"\ 62\ 5span class="autotrace"\ 6 trace \ 5/span\ 6\ 5/span\ 6/ | /\ 5span class="autotactic"\ 62\ 5span class="autotrace"\ 6 trace \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/Or.con(0,1,2)"\ 6or_introl\ 5/a\ 6\ 5/span\ 6\ 5/span\ 6/]
qed.
-lemma cat_ext_r: ∀S.∀A,B,C:word S →Prop.
- B =1 C → A · B =1 A · C.
-#S #A #B #C #H #w % * #w1 * #w2 * * #eqw #inw1 #inw2
-cases (H w2) /6/
+lemma union_comm : ∀U.∀A,B:U →Prop.
+ A \ 5a title="union" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∪\ 5/a\ 6 B \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 B \ 5a title="union" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∪\ 5/a\ 6 A.
+#U #A #B #a % * /\ 5span class="autotactic"\ 62\ 5span class="autotrace"\ 6 trace \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/Or.con(0,1,2)"\ 6or_introl\ 5/a\ 6, \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/Or.con(0,2,2)"\ 6or_intror\ 5/a\ 6\ 5/span\ 6\ 5/span\ 6/ qed.
+
+lemma union_assoc: ∀U.∀A,B,C:U → Prop.
+ A \ 5a title="union" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∪\ 5/a\ 6 B \ 5a title="union" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∪\ 5/a\ 6 C \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 A \ 5a title="union" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∪\ 5/a\ 6 (B \ 5a title="union" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∪\ 5/a\ 6 C).
+#S #A #B #C #w % [* [* /\ 5span class="autotactic"\ 63\ 5span class="autotrace"\ 6 trace \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/Or.con(0,1,2)"\ 6or_introl\ 5/a\ 6, \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/Or.con(0,2,2)"\ 6or_intror\ 5/a\ 6\ 5/span\ 6\ 5/span\ 6/ | /\ 5span class="autotactic"\ 63\ 5span class="autotrace"\ 6 trace \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/Or.con(0,2,2)"\ 6or_intror\ 5/a\ 6\ 5/span\ 6\ 5/span\ 6/] | * [/\ 5span class="autotactic"\ 63\ 5span class="autotrace"\ 6 trace \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/Or.con(0,1,2)"\ 6or_introl\ 5/a\ 6\ 5/span\ 6\ 5/span\ 6/ | * /\ 5span class="autotactic"\ 63\ 5span class="autotrace"\ 6 trace \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/Or.con(0,1,2)"\ 6or_introl\ 5/a\ 6, \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/Or.con(0,2,2)"\ 6or_intror\ 5/a\ 6\ 5/span\ 6\ 5/span\ 6/]
+qed.
+
+(* In the same way we prove commutativity and associativity for set
+interesection *)
+
+lemma cap_comm : ∀U.∀A,B:U →Prop.
+ A \ 5a title="intersection" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∩\ 5/a\ 6 B \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 B \ 5a title="intersection" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∩\ 5/a\ 6 A.
+#U #A #B #a % * /\ 5span class="autotactic"\ 62\ 5span class="autotrace"\ 6 trace \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/And.con(0,1,2)"\ 6conj\ 5/a\ 6\ 5/span\ 6\ 5/span\ 6/ qed.
+
+lemma cap_assoc: ∀U.∀A,B,C:U→Prop.
+ A \ 5a title="intersection" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∩\ 5/a\ 6 (B \ 5a title="intersection" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∩\ 5/a\ 6 C) \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 (A \ 5a title="intersection" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∩\ 5/a\ 6 B) \ 5a title="intersection" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∩\ 5/a\ 6 C.
+#U #A #B #C #w % [ * #Aw * /\ 5span class="autotactic"\ 63\ 5span class="autotrace"\ 6 trace \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/And.con(0,1,2)"\ 6conj\ 5/a\ 6\ 5/span\ 6\ 5/span\ 6/ \ 5span class="autotactic"\ 6\ 5span class="autotrace"\ 6\ 5/span\ 6\ 5/span\ 6| * * /\ 5span class="autotactic"\ 63\ 5span class="autotrace"\ 6 trace \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/And.con(0,1,2)"\ 6conj\ 5/a\ 6\ 5/span\ 6\ 5/span\ 6/ ]
+qed.
+
+(* We can also easily prove idempotency for union and intersection *)
+
+lemma union_idemp: ∀U.∀A:U →Prop.
+ A \ 5a title="union" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∪\ 5/a\ 6 A \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 A.
+#U #A #a % [* // | /\ 5span class="autotactic"\ 62\ 5span class="autotrace"\ 6 trace \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/Or.con(0,2,2)"\ 6or_intror\ 5/a\ 6\ 5/span\ 6\ 5/span\ 6/] qed.
+
+lemma cap_idemp: ∀U.∀A:U →Prop.
+ A \ 5a title="intersection" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∩\ 5/a\ 6 A \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 A.
+#U #A #a % [* // | /\ 5span class="autotactic"\ 62\ 5span class="autotrace"\ 6 trace \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/And.con(0,1,2)"\ 6conj\ 5/a\ 6\ 5/span\ 6\ 5/span\ 6/] qed.
+
+(* We conclude our examples with a couple of distributivity theorems, and a
+characterization of substraction in terms of interesection and complementation. *)
+
+lemma distribute_intersect : ∀U.∀A,B,C:U→Prop.
+ (A \ 5a title="union" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∪\ 5/a\ 6 B) \ 5a title="intersection" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∩\ 5/a\ 6 C \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 (A \ 5a title="intersection" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∩\ 5/a\ 6 C) \ 5a title="union" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∪\ 5/a\ 6 (B \ 5a title="intersection" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∩\ 5/a\ 6 C).
+#U #A #B #C #w % [* * /\ 5span class="autotactic"\ 63\ 5span class="autotrace"\ 6 trace \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/Or.con(0,1,2)"\ 6or_introl\ 5/a\ 6, \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/Or.con(0,2,2)"\ 6or_intror\ 5/a\ 6, \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/And.con(0,1,2)"\ 6conj\ 5/a\ 6\ 5/span\ 6\ 5/span\ 6/ | * * /\ 5span class="autotactic"\ 63\ 5span class="autotrace"\ 6 trace \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/Or.con(0,1,2)"\ 6or_introl\ 5/a\ 6, \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/Or.con(0,2,2)"\ 6or_intror\ 5/a\ 6, \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/And.con(0,1,2)"\ 6conj\ 5/a\ 6\ 5/span\ 6\ 5/span\ 6/]
qed.
-lemma distr_cat_r: ∀S.∀A,B,C:word S →Prop.
- (A ∪ B) · C =1 A · C ∪ B · C.
-#S #A #B #C #w %
- [* #w1 * #w2 * * #eqw * /6/ |* * #w1 * #w2 * * /6/]
+lemma distribute_substract : ∀U.∀A,B,C:U→Prop.
+ (A \ 5a title="union" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∪\ 5/a\ 6 B) \ 5a title="substraction" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6-\ 5/a\ 6 C \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 (A \ 5a title="substraction" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6-\ 5/a\ 6 C) \ 5a title="union" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∪\ 5/a\ 6 (B \ 5a title="substraction" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6-\ 5/a\ 6 C).
+#U #A #B #C #w % [* * /\ 5span class="autotactic"\ 63\ 5span class="autotrace"\ 6 trace \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/Or.con(0,1,2)"\ 6or_introl\ 5/a\ 6, \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/Or.con(0,2,2)"\ 6or_intror\ 5/a\ 6, \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/And.con(0,1,2)"\ 6conj\ 5/a\ 6\ 5/span\ 6\ 5/span\ 6/ | * * /\ 5span class="autotactic"\ 63\ 5span class="autotrace"\ 6 trace \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/Or.con(0,1,2)"\ 6or_introl\ 5/a\ 6, \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/Or.con(0,2,2)"\ 6or_intror\ 5/a\ 6, \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/And.con(0,1,2)"\ 6conj\ 5/a\ 6\ 5/span\ 6\ 5/span\ 6/]
qed.
-lemma espilon_in_star: ∀S.∀A:word S → Prop.
- A^* ϵ.
-#S #A @(ex_intro … [ ]) normalize /2/
+lemma substract_def:∀U.∀A,B:U→Prop. A\ 5a title="substraction" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6-\ 5/a\ 6B \ 5a title="extensional equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 61 A \ 5a title="intersection" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∩\ 5/a\ 6 \ 5a title="complement" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6¬\ 5/a\ 6B.
+#U #A #B #w normalize /\ 5span class="autotactic"\ 62\ 5span class="autotrace"\ 6 trace \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/And.con(0,1,2)"\ 6conj\ 5/a\ 6\ 5/span\ 6\ 5/span\ 6/
qed.
-lemma cat_to_star:∀S.∀A:word S → Prop.
- ∀w1,w2. A w1 → A^* w2 → A^* (w1@w2).
-#S #A #w1 #w2 #Aw * #l * #H #H1 @(ex_intro … (w1::l))
-% normalize /2/
-qed.
+(* In several situation it is important to assume to have a decidable equality
+between elements of a set U, namely a boolean function eqb: U→U→bool such that
+for any pair of elements a and b in U, (eqb x y) is true if and only if x=y.
+A set equipped with such an equality is called a DeqSet: *)
-lemma fix_star: ∀S.∀A:word S → Prop.
- A^* =1 A · A^* ∪ {ϵ}.
-#S #A #w %
- [* #l generalize in match w; -w cases l [normalize #w * /2/]
- #w1 #tl #w * whd in ⊢ ((??%?)→?); #eqw whd in ⊢ (%→?); *
- #w1A #cw1 %1 @(ex_intro … w1) @(ex_intro … (flatten S tl))
- % /2/ whd @(ex_intro … tl) /2/
- |* [2: whd in ⊢ (%→?); #eqw <eqw //]
- * #w1 * #w2 * * #eqw <eqw @cat_to_star
+record DeqSet : Type[1] ≝ { carr :> Type[0];
+ eqb: carr → carr → \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/bool/bool.ind(1,0,0)"\ 6bool\ 5/a\ 6;
+ eqb_true: ∀x,y. (eqb x y \ 5a title="leibnitz's equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 6 \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/bool/bool.con(0,1,0)"\ 6true\ 5/a\ 6) \ 5a title="iff" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6↔\ 5/a\ 6 (x \ 5a title="leibnitz's equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 6 y)
+}.
+
+(* We use the notation == to denote the decidable equality, to distinguish it
+from the propositional equality. In particular, a term of the form a==b is a
+boolean, while a=b is a proposition. *)
+
+notation "a == b" non associative with precedence 45 for @{ 'eqb $a $b }.
+interpretation "eqb" 'eqb a b = (eqb ? a b).
+
+(* It is convenient to have a simple way to reflect a proof of the fact
+that (eqb a b) is true into a proof of the proposition (a = b); to this aim,
+we introduce two operators "\P" and "\b". *)
+
+notation "\P H" non associative with precedence 90
+ for @{(proj1 … (eqb_true ???) $H)}.
+
+notation "\b H" non associative with precedence 90
+ for @{(proj2 … (eqb_true ???) $H)}.
+
+(* If H:eqb a b = true, then \P H: a = b, and conversely if h:a = b, then
+\b h: eqb a b = true. Let us see an example of their use: the following
+statement asserts that we can reflect a proof that eqb a b is false into
+a proof of the proposition a ≠ b. *)
+
+lemma eqb_false: ∀S:\ 5a href="cic:/matita/tutorial/chapter4/DeqSet.ind(1,0,0)"\ 6DeqSet\ 5/a\ 6.∀a,b:S.
+ (\ 5a href="cic:/matita/tutorial/chapter4/eqb.fix(0,0,3)"\ 6eqb\ 5/a\ 6 ? a b) \ 5a title="leibnitz's equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 6 \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/bool/bool.con(0,2,0)"\ 6false\ 5/a\ 6 \ 5a title="iff" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6↔\ 5/a\ 6 a \ 5a title="leibnitz's non-equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6≠\ 5/a\ 6 b.
+
+(* We start the proof introducing the hypothesis, and then split the "if" and
+"only if" cases *)
+
+#S #a #b % #H
+
+(* The latter is easily reduced to prove the goal true=false under the assumption
+H1: a = b *)
+ [@(\ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/not_to_not.def(3)"\ 6not_to_not\ 5/a\ 6 … \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/bool/not_eq_true_false.def(3)"\ 6not_eq_true_false\ 5/a\ 6) #H1
+
+(* since by assumption H false is equal to (a==b), by rewriting we obtain the goal
+true=(a==b) that is just the boolean version of H1 *)
+
+ <H @\ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/sym_eq.def(2)"\ 6sym_eq\ 5/a\ 6 @(\b H1)
+
+(* In the "if" case, we proceed by cases over the boolean equality (a==b); if
+(a==b) is false, the goal is trivial; the other case is absurd, since if (a==b) is
+true, then by reflection a=b, while by hypothesis a≠b *)
+
+ |cases (\ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/bool/true_or_false.def(1)"\ 6true_or_false\ 5/a\ 6 (\ 5a href="cic:/matita/tutorial/chapter4/eqb.fix(0,0,3)"\ 6eqb\ 5/a\ 6 ? a b)) // #H1 @\ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/False_ind.fix(0,1,1)"\ 6False_ind\ 5/a\ 6 @(\ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/absurd.def(2)"\ 6absurd\ 5/a\ 6 … (\P H1) H)
]
qed.
+
+(* We also introduce two operators "\Pf" and "\bf" to reflect a proof
+of (a==b)=false into a proof of a≠b, and vice-versa *)
-lemma star_fix_eps : ∀S.∀A:word S → Prop.
- A^* =1 (A - {ϵ}) · A^* ∪ {ϵ}.
-#S #A #w %
- [* #l elim l
- [* whd in ⊢ ((??%?)→?); #eqw #_ %2 <eqw //
- |* [#tl #Hind * #H * #_ #H2 @Hind % [@H | //]
- |#a #w1 #tl #Hind * whd in ⊢ ((??%?)→?); #H1 * #H2 #H3 %1
- @(ex_intro … (a::w1)) @(ex_intro … (flatten S tl)) %
- [% [@H1 | normalize % /2/] |whd @(ex_intro … tl) /2/]
- ]
- ]
- |* [* #w1 * #w2 * * #eqw * #H1 #_ <eqw @cat_to_star //
- | whd in ⊢ (%→?); #H <H //
- ]
- ]
+notation "\Pf H" non associative with precedence 90
+ for @{(proj1 … (eqb_false ???) $H)}.
+
+notation "\bf H" non associative with precedence 90
+ for @{(proj2 … (eqb_false ???) $H)}.
+
+(* The following statement proves that propositional equality in a
+DeqSet is decidable in the traditional sense, namely either a=b or a≠b *)
+
+ lemma dec_eq: ∀S:\ 5a href="cic:/matita/tutorial/chapter4/DeqSet.ind(1,0,0)"\ 6DeqSet\ 5/a\ 6.∀a,b:S. a \ 5a title="leibnitz's equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 6 b \ 5a title="logical or" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6∨\ 5/a\ 6 a \ 5a title="leibnitz's non-equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6≠\ 5/a\ 6 b.
+#S #a #b cases (\ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/bool/true_or_false.def(1)"\ 6true_or_false\ 5/a\ 6 (\ 5a href="cic:/matita/tutorial/chapter4/eqb.fix(0,0,3)"\ 6eqb\ 5/a\ 6 ? a b)) #H
+ [%1 @(\P H) | %2 @(\Pf H)]
+qed.
+
+(* A simple example of a set with a decidable equality is bool. We first define
+the boolean equality beqb, that is just the xand function, then prove that
+beqb b1 b2 is true if and only if b1=b2, and finally build the type DeqBool by
+instantiating the DeqSet record with the previous information *)
+
+definition beqb ≝ λb1,b2.
+ match b1 with [ true ⇒ b2 | false ⇒ \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/bool/notb.def(1)"\ 6notb\ 5/a\ 6 b2].
+
+notation < "a == b" non associative with precedence 45 for @{beqb $a $b }.
+
+lemma beqb_true: ∀b1,b2. \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/iff.def(1)"\ 6iff\ 5/a\ 6 (\ 5a href="cic:/matita/tutorial/chapter4/beqb.def(2)"\ 6beqb\ 5/a\ 6 b1 b2 \ 5a title="leibnitz's equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 6 \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/bool/bool.con(0,1,0)"\ 6true\ 5/a\ 6) (b1 \ 5a title="leibnitz's equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 6 b2).
+#b1 #b2 cases b1 cases b2 normalize /\ 5span class="autotactic"\ 62\ 5span class="autotrace"\ 6 trace \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/logic/And.con(0,1,2)"\ 6conj\ 5/a\ 6\ 5/span\ 6\ 5/span\ 6/
qed.
-
-lemma star_epsilon: ∀S:DeqSet.∀A:word S → Prop.
- A^* ∪ {ϵ} =1 A^*.
-#S #A #w % /2/ * //
+
+definition DeqBool ≝ \ 5a href="cic:/matita/tutorial/chapter4/DeqSet.con(0,1,0)"\ 6mk_DeqSet\ 5/a\ 6 \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/bool/bool.ind(1,0,0)"\ 6bool\ 5/a\ 6 \ 5a href="cic:/matita/tutorial/chapter4/beqb.def(2)"\ 6beqb\ 5/a\ 6 \ 5a href="cic:/matita/tutorial/chapter4/beqb_true.def(4)"\ 6beqb_true\ 5/a\ 6.
+
+(* At this point, we would expect to be able to prove things like the
+following: for any boolean b, if b==false is true then b=false.
+Unfortunately, this would not work, unless we declare b of type
+DeqBool (change the type in the following statement and see what
+happens). *)
+
+example exhint: ∀b:\ 5a href="cic:/matita/tutorial/chapter4/DeqBool.def(5)"\ 6DeqBool\ 5/a\ 6. (b\ 5a title="eqb" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 6=\ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/bool/bool.con(0,2,0)"\ 6false\ 5/a\ 6) \ 5a title="leibnitz's equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 6 \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/bool/bool.con(0,1,0)"\ 6true\ 5/a\ 6 → b\ 5a title="leibnitz's equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 6\ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/bool/bool.con(0,2,0)"\ 6false\ 5/a\ 6.
+#b #H @(\P H)
qed.
-
-lemma epsilon_cat_r: ∀S.∀A:word S →Prop.
- A · {ϵ} =1 A.
-#S #A #w %
- [* #w1 * #w2 * * #eqw #inw1 normalize #eqw2 <eqw //
- |#inA @(ex_intro … w) @(ex_intro … [ ]) /3/
- ]
+
+(* The point is that == expects in input a pair of objects object whose type
+must be the carrier of a DeqSet; bool is indeed the carrier of DeqBool, but the
+type inference system has no knowledge of it (it is an information that has been
+supplied by the user, and stored somewhere in the library). More explicitly, the
+type inference inference system, would face an unification problem consisting to
+unify bool against the carrier of something (a metavaribale) and it has no way to
+synthetize the answer. To solve this kind of situations, matita provides a
+mechanism to hint the system the expected solution. A unification hint is a kind of
+rule, whose rhd is the unification problem, containing some metavariables X1, ...,
+Xn, and whose left hand side is the solution suggested to the system, in the form
+of equations Xi=Mi. The hint is accepted by the system if and only the solution is
+correct, that is, if it is a unifier for the given problem.
+To make an example, in the previous case, the unification problem is bool = carr X,
+and the hint is to take X= mk_DeqSet bool beqb true. The hint is correct, since
+bool is convertible with (carr (mk_DeqSet bool beb true)). *)
+
+unification hint 0 \ 5a href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)" title="hint_decl_Type1"\ 6≔\ 5/a\ 6 ;
+ X ≟ \ 5a href="cic:/matita/tutorial/chapter4/DeqSet.con(0,1,0)"\ 6mk_DeqSet\ 5/a\ 6 \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/bool/bool.ind(1,0,0)"\ 6bool\ 5/a\ 6 \ 5a href="cic:/matita/tutorial/chapter4/beqb.def(2)"\ 6beqb\ 5/a\ 6 \ 5a href="cic:/matita/tutorial/chapter4/beqb_true.def(4)"\ 6beqb_true\ 5/a\ 6
+(* ---------------------------------------- *) ⊢
+ \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/bool/bool.ind(1,0,0)"\ 6bool\ 5/a\ 6 ≡ \ 5a href="cic:/matita/tutorial/chapter4/carr.fix(0,0,2)"\ 6carr\ 5/a\ 6 X.
+
+unification hint 0 \ 5a href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)" title="hint_decl_Type0"\ 6≔\ 5/a\ 6 b1,b2:\ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/bool/bool.ind(1,0,0)"\ 6bool\ 5/a\ 6;
+ X ≟ \ 5a href="cic:/matita/tutorial/chapter4/DeqSet.con(0,1,0)"\ 6mk_DeqSet\ 5/a\ 6 \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/bool/bool.ind(1,0,0)"\ 6bool\ 5/a\ 6 \ 5a href="cic:/matita/tutorial/chapter4/beqb.def(2)"\ 6beqb\ 5/a\ 6 \ 5a href="cic:/matita/tutorial/chapter4/beqb_true.def(4)"\ 6beqb_true\ 5/a\ 6
+(* ---------------------------------------- *) ⊢
+ \ 5a href="cic:/matita/tutorial/chapter4/beqb.def(2)"\ 6beqb\ 5/a\ 6 b1 b2 ≡ \ 5a href="cic:/matita/tutorial/chapter4/eqb.fix(0,0,3)"\ 6eqb\ 5/a\ 6 X b1 b2.
+
+(* After having provided the previous hints, we may rewrite example exhint delcaring
+b of type bool. *)
+
+example exhint1: ∀b:\ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/bool/bool.ind(1,0,0)"\ 6bool\ 5/a\ 6. (b \ 5a title="eqb" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 6= \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/bool/bool.con(0,2,0)"\ 6false\ 5/a\ 6) \ 5a title="leibnitz's equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 6 \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/bool/bool.con(0,1,0)"\ 6true\ 5/a\ 6 → b \ 5a title="leibnitz's equality" href="cic:/fakeuri.def(1)"\ 6=\ 5/a\ 6 \ 5a href="cic:/matita/basics/bool/bool.con(0,2,0)"\ 6false\ 5/a\ 6.
+#b #H @(\P H)
qed.
-lemma epsilon_cat_l: ∀S.∀A:word S →Prop.
- {ϵ} · A =1 A.
-#S #A #w %
- [* #w1 * #w2 * * #eqw normalize #eqw2 <eqw <eqw2 //
- |#inA @(ex_intro … ϵ) @(ex_intro … w) /3/
+(* pairs *)
+definition eq_pairs ≝
+ λA,B:DeqSet.λp1,p2:A×B.(\fst p1 == \fst p2) ∧ (\snd p1 == \snd p2).
+
+lemma eq_pairs_true: ∀A,B:DeqSet.∀p1,p2:A×B.
+ eq_pairs A B p1 p2 = true ↔ p1 = p2.
+#A #B * #a1 #b1 * #a2 #b2 %
+ [#H cases (andb_true …H) normalize #eqa #eqb >(\P eqa) >(\P eqb) //
+ |#H destruct normalize >(\b (refl … a2)) >(\b (refl … b2)) //
]
qed.
-lemma distr_cat_r_eps: ∀S.∀A,C:word S →Prop.
- (A ∪ {ϵ}) · C =1 A · C ∪ C.
-#S #A #C @eqP_trans [|@distr_cat_r |@eqP_union_l @epsilon_cat_l]
-qed.
+definition DeqProd ≝ λA,B:DeqSet.
+ mk_DeqSet (A×B) (eq_pairs A B) (eq_pairs_true A B).
+
+unification hint 0 ≔ C1,C2;
+ T1 ≟ carr C1,
+ T2 ≟ carr C2,
+ X ≟ DeqProd C1 C2
+(* ---------------------------------------- *) ⊢
+ T1×T2 ≡ carr X.
+
+unification hint 0 ≔ T1,T2,p1,p2;
+ X ≟ DeqProd T1 T2
+(* ---------------------------------------- *) ⊢
+ eq_pairs T1 T2 p1 p2 ≡ eqb X p1 p2.
+example hint2: ∀b1,b2.
+ 〈b1,true〉==〈false,b2〉=true → 〈b1,true〉=〈false,b2〉.
+#b1 #b2 #H @(\P H).
\ No newline at end of file
projects / helm.git / blobdiff