From: Enrico Tassi Date: Sun, 26 Oct 2008 12:13:00 +0000 (+0000) Subject: all done in declarative style X-Git-Tag: make_still_working~4637 X-Git-Url: http://matita.cs.unibo.it/gitweb/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=eef06951eedca0b538ed74c4daa937c808c3fc09;p=helm.git all done in declarative style --- diff --git a/helm/software/matita/contribs/didactic/duality.ma b/helm/software/matita/contribs/didactic/duality.ma index fd8e0d17a..8b7f5a399 100644 --- a/helm/software/matita/contribs/didactic/duality.ma +++ b/helm/software/matita/contribs/didactic/duality.ma @@ -1,60 +1,76 @@ include "nat/minus.ma". -let rec max n m on n ≝ - match n with [ O ⇒ m | S n ⇒ - match m with [ O ⇒ S n | S m ⇒ S (max n m)]]. -let rec min n m on n ≝ - match n with [ O ⇒ O | S n ⇒ - match m with [ O ⇒ O | S m ⇒ S (min n m)]]. + +let rec max n m on n ≝ match n - m with [ O => m | _ => n]. +let rec min n m on n ≝ match n - m with [ O => n | _ => m]. +definition if_then_else ≝ λT:Type.λe,t,f.match e return λ_.T with [ true ⇒ t | false ⇒ f]. +notation > "'if' term 19 e 'then' term 19 t 'else' term 90 f" non associative with precedence 90 for @{ 'if_then_else $e $t $f }. +notation < "'if' \nbsp term 19 e \nbsp 'then' \nbsp term 19 t \nbsp 'else' \nbsp term 90 f \nbsp" non associative with precedence 90 for @{ 'if_then_else $e $t $f }. +interpretation "Formula if_then_else" 'if_then_else e t f = (if_then_else _ e t f). + inductive Formula : Type ≝ | FBot: Formula -| FTop: (*BEGIN*)Formula(*END*) -| FAtom: nat → Formula (* usiamo i naturali al posto delle lettere *) +| FTop: Formula +| FAtom: nat → Formula | FAnd: Formula → Formula → Formula -| FOr: (*BEGIN*)Formula → Formula → Formula(*END*) -| FImpl: (*BEGIN*)Formula → Formula → Formula(*END*) -| FNot: (*BEGIN*)Formula → Formula(*END*) +| FOr: Formula → Formula → Formula +| FImpl: Formula → Formula → Formula +| FNot: Formula → Formula . - - let rec sem (v: nat → nat) (F: Formula) on F ≝ match F with [ FBot ⇒ 0 - | FTop ⇒ (*BEGIN*)1(*END*) - (*BEGIN*) - | FAtom n ⇒ v n - (*END*) - | FAnd F1 F2 ⇒ (*BEGIN*)min (sem v F1) (sem v F2)(*END*) - (*BEGIN*) + | FTop ⇒ 1 + | FAtom n ⇒ min (v n) 1 + | FAnd F1 F2 ⇒ min (sem v F1) (sem v F2) | FOr F1 F2 ⇒ max (sem v F1) (sem v F2) | FImpl F1 F2 ⇒ max (1 - sem v F1) (sem v F2) - (*END*) | FNot F1 ⇒ 1 - (sem v F1) ] . - -definition if_then_else ≝ λT:Type.λe,t,f.match e return λ_.T with [ true ⇒ t | false ⇒ f]. -notation > "'if' term 19 e 'then' term 19 t 'else' term 90 f" non associative with precedence 90 for @{ 'if_then_else $e $t $f }. -notation < "'if' \nbsp term 19 e \nbsp 'then' \nbsp term 19 t \nbsp 'else' \nbsp term 90 f \nbsp" non associative with precedence 90 for @{ 'if_then_else $e $t $f }. -interpretation "Formula if_then_else" 'if_then_else e t f = (if_then_else _ e t f). notation < "[[ \nbsp term 19 a \nbsp ]] \nbsp \sub term 90 v" non associative with precedence 90 for @{ 'semantics $v $a }. notation > "[[ term 19 a ]] \sub term 90 v" non associative with precedence 90 for @{ 'semantics $v $a }. notation > "[[ term 19 a ]]_ term 90 v" non associative with precedence 90 for @{ sem $v $a }. interpretation "Semantic of Formula" 'semantics v a = (sem v a). - -let rec subst (F: Formula) on F ≝ +lemma sem_bool : ∀F,v. [[ F ]]_v = 0 ∨ [[ F ]]_v = 1. +intros; elim F; simplify; +[left;reflexivity; +|right;reflexivity; +|cases (v n);[left;|cases n1;right;]reflexivity; +|4,5,6: cases H; cases H1; rewrite > H2; rewrite > H3; simplify; + first [ left;reflexivity | right; reflexivity ]. +|cases H; rewrite > H1; simplify;[right|left]reflexivity;] +qed. + +lemma min_bool : ∀n. min n 1 = 0 ∨ min n 1 = 1. +intros; cases n; [left;reflexivity] cases n1; right; reflexivity; +qed. + +lemma min_max : ∀F,G,v. + min (1 - [[F]]_v) (1 - [[G]]_v) = 1 - max [[F]]_v [[G]]_v. +intros; cases (sem_bool F v);cases (sem_bool G v); rewrite > H; rewrite >H1; +simplify; reflexivity; +qed. + +lemma max_min : ∀F,G,v. + max (1 - [[F]]_v) (1 - [[G]]_v) = 1 - min [[F]]_v [[G]]_v. +intros; cases (sem_bool F v);cases (sem_bool G v); rewrite > H; rewrite >H1; +simplify; reflexivity; +qed. + +let rec negate (F: Formula) on F ≝ match F with [ FBot ⇒ FBot | FTop ⇒ FTop | FAtom n ⇒ FNot (FAtom n) - | FAnd F1 F2 ⇒ FAnd (subst F1) (subst F2) - | FOr F1 F2 ⇒ FOr (subst F1) (subst F2) - | FImpl F1 F2 ⇒ FImpl (subst F1) (subst F2) - | FNot F ⇒ FNot (subst F) + | FAnd F1 F2 ⇒ FAnd (negate F1) (negate F2) + | FOr F1 F2 ⇒ FOr (negate F1) (negate F2) + | FImpl F1 F2 ⇒ FImpl (negate F1) (negate F2) + | FNot F ⇒ FNot (negate F) ]. @@ -63,6 +79,8 @@ notation "hvbox(a \nbsp break mstyle color #0000ff (≡) \nbsp b)" non associat notation > "a ≡ b" non associative with precedence 50 for @{ equiv $a $b }. interpretation "equivalence for Formulas" 'equivF a b = (equiv a b). +lemma equiv_rewrite : ∀F1,F2,F3. F1 ≡ F2 → F1 ≡ F3 → F2 ≡ F3. intros; intro; autobatch. qed. + let rec dualize (F : Formula) on F : Formula ≝ match F with [ FBot ⇒ FTop @@ -74,64 +92,317 @@ let rec dualize (F : Formula) on F : Formula ≝ | FNot F ⇒ FNot (dualize F) ]. -lemma max_n_O : ∀n. max n O = n. intros; cases n; reflexivity; qed. - -lemma min_n_n : ∀n. min n n = n. intros; elim n; [reflexivity] simplify; rewrite > H; reflexivity; qed. - -lemma min_le: ∀m,n. n ≤ m → min n m = n. -intro; elim m; [cases n in H; intros; [reflexivity] cases (not_le_Sn_O ? H)] -cases n1 in H1; - - -lemma xxx : ∀a,b,c.min (min a b) c = min a (min b c). -intros; elim a; [reflexivity] elim b in c H 0; [intros;reflexivity] intros; -lapply depth=0 (H O); - - -simplify in ⊢ (? ? ? (? ? %)); -simplify in ⊢ (? ? (? % ?) ?); -simplify in H:(? ? (? % ?) ?); -simplify in H:(? ? ? (? ? %)); -simplify in ⊢ (? ? ? %);reflexivity] -simplify in ⊢ (? ? (? % ?) ?);reflexivity] +definition invert ≝ + λv:ℕ -> ℕ. λx. if eqb (min (v x) 1) 0 then 1 else 0. + +(*DOCBEGIN + +Il linguaggio di dimostrazione di Matita +======================================== + +Per dimostrare questo teorema in modo agevole è necessario utilizzare il +seguente comando: + +* `symmetry` + + Quando la conclusuine è `a = b` permette di cambiarla in `b = a`. + +DOCEND*) +theorem negate_invert: + ∀F:Formula.∀v:ℕ→ℕ.[[ negate F ]]_v=[[ F ]]_(invert v). +assume F:Formula. +assume v:(ℕ→ℕ). +we proceed by induction on F to prove ([[ negate F ]]_v=[[ F ]]_(invert v)). + case FBot . + the thesis becomes ([[ negate FBot ]]_v=[[ FBot ]]_(invert v)). + done. + case FTop . + the thesis becomes ([[ negate FTop ]]_v=[[ FTop ]]_(invert v)). + done. + case FAtom. + assume n : ℕ. + the thesis becomes ([[ negate (FAtom n) ]]_v=[[ FAtom n ]]_(invert v)). + the thesis becomes (1 - (min (v n) 1)= min (invert v n) 1). + the thesis becomes (1 - (min (v n) 1)= min (if eqb (min (v n) 1) 0 then 1 else 0) 1). + by min_bool we proved (min (v n) 1 = 0 ∨ min (v n) 1 = 1) (H1); + we proceed by cases on (H1) to prove (1 - (min (v n) 1)= min (if eqb (min (v n) 1) 0 then 1 else 0) 1). + case Left. + conclude + (1 - (min (v n) 1)) + = (1 - 0) by H. + = 1. + symmetry. + conclude + (min (if eqb (min (v n) 1) O then 1 else O) 1) + = (min (if eqb 0 0 then 1 else O) 1) by H. + = (min 1 1). + = 1. + done. + case Right. + conclude + (1 - (min (v n) 1)) + = (1 - 1) by H. + = 0. + symmetry. + conclude + (min (if eqb (min (v n) 1) O then 1 else O) 1) + = (min (if eqb 1 0 then 1 else O) 1) by H. + = (min 0 1). + = 0. + done. + case FAnd. + assume f : Formula. + by induction hypothesis we know + ([[ negate f ]]_v=[[ f ]]_(invert v)) (H). + assume f1 : Formula. + by induction hypothesis we know + ([[ negate f1 ]]_v=[[ f1 ]]_(invert v)) (H1). + the thesis becomes + ([[ negate (FAnd f f1) ]]_v=[[ FAnd f f1 ]]_(invert v)). + the thesis becomes + (min [[ negate f ]]_v [[ negate f1]]_v = [[ FAnd f f1 ]]_(invert v)). + conclude + (min [[ negate f ]]_v [[ negate f1]]_v) + = (min [[ f ]]_(invert v) [[ negate f1]]_v) by H. + = (min [[ f ]]_(invert v) [[ f1]]_(invert v)) by H1. + done. + case FOr. + assume f : Formula. + by induction hypothesis we know + ([[ negate f ]]_v=[[ f ]]_(invert v)) (H). + assume f1 : Formula. + by induction hypothesis we know + ([[ negate f1 ]]_v=[[ f1 ]]_(invert v)) (H1). + the thesis becomes + ([[ negate (FOr f f1) ]]_v=[[ FOr f f1 ]]_(invert v)). + the thesis becomes + (max [[ negate f ]]_v [[ negate f1]]_v = [[ FOr f f1 ]]_(invert v)). + conclude + (max [[ negate f ]]_v [[ negate f1]]_v) + = (max [[ f ]]_(invert v) [[ negate f1]]_v) by H. + = (max [[ f ]]_(invert v) [[ f1]]_(invert v)) by H1. + done. + case FImpl. + assume f : Formula. + by induction hypothesis we know + ([[ negate f ]]_v=[[ f ]]_(invert v)) (H). + assume f1 : Formula. + by induction hypothesis we know + ([[ negate f1 ]]_v=[[ f1 ]]_(invert v)) (H1). + the thesis becomes + ([[ negate (FImpl f f1) ]]_v=[[ FImpl f f1 ]]_(invert v)). + the thesis becomes + (max (1 - [[ negate f ]]_v) [[ negate f1]]_v = [[ FImpl f f1 ]]_(invert v)). + conclude + (max (1 - [[ negate f ]]_v) [[ negate f1]]_v) + = (max (1 - [[ f ]]_(invert v)) [[ negate f1]]_v) by H. + = (max (1 - [[ f ]]_(invert v)) [[ f1]]_(invert v)) by H1. + done. + case FNot. + assume f : Formula. + by induction hypothesis we know + ([[ negate f ]]_v=[[ f ]]_(invert v)) (H). + the thesis becomes + ([[ negate (FNot f) ]]_v=[[ FNot f ]]_(invert v)). + the thesis becomes + (1 - [[ negate f ]]_v=[[ FNot f ]]_(invert v)). + conclude (1 - [[ negate f ]]_v) = (1 - [[f]]_(invert v)) by H. + done. +qed. + +(* +lemma negate_fun : ∀F,G. F ≡ G → negate F ≡ negate G. +intros; intro v; rewrite > (negate_invert ? v);rewrite > (negate_invert ? v); +apply H; +qed. *) -lemma min_minus_n_m : ∀n,m. min (n-m) n = n-m. -intros; apply (nat_elim2 ???? n m); intros; [reflexivity] -[ rewrite < minus_n_O; apply min_n_n] - - - cases m; [ rewrite < minus_n_O; apply min_n_n] - -lapply (H (S w)) as K; rewrite < minus_n_O in K; apply eq_f; assumption;] -rewrite < (H n2) in ⊢ (? ? ? %); - -simplify in ⊢ (? ? (? % ?) ?);simplify; rewrite > (H n1); - -lemma min_one : - ∀x,y.1 - max x y = min (1 -x) (1-y). -intros; apply (nat_elim2 ???? y x); intros; -[ rewrite > max_n_O; -whd in ⊢ (? ? ? (? ? %)); - - +theorem negate_fun: + ∀F:Formula.∀G:Formula.F ≡ G→negate F ≡ negate G. + assume F:Formula. + assume G:Formula. + suppose (F ≡ G) (H). + the thesis becomes (negate F ≡ negate G). + the thesis becomes (∀v:ℕ→ℕ.[[ negate F ]]_v=[[ negate G ]]_v). + assume v:(ℕ→ℕ). + conclude + [[ negate F ]]_v + = [[ F ]]_(invert v) by negate_invert. + = [[ G ]]_(invert v) by H. + = [[ negate G ]]_v by negate_invert. + done. +qed. +(* +lemma not_dualize_eq_negate : ∀F. FNot (dualize F) ≡ negate F. +intros; intro; elim F; intros; try reflexivity; +[1,2: simplify in ⊢ (? ? ? %); rewrite <(H); rewrite <(H1); + [rewrite < (min_max (dualize f) (dualize f1) v); reflexivity; + |rewrite < (max_min (dualize f) (dualize f1) v); reflexivity;] +|3: change in ⊢ (? ? ? %) with [[FImpl (negate f) (negate f1)]]_v; + change in ⊢ (? ? ? %) with (max (1 - [[negate f]]_v) [[negate f1]]_v); + rewrite (max_min (FNot (dualize f)) ((dualize f1)) v);reflexivity; +|4: simplify; rewrite < H; reflexivity;] +qed. +*) - +theorem not_dualize_eq_negate: + ∀F:Formula.negate F ≡ FNot (dualize F). + assume F:Formula. + the thesis becomes (∀v:ℕ→ℕ.[[negate F]]_v=[[FNot (dualize F)]]_v). + assume v:(ℕ→ℕ). + we proceed by induction on F to prove ([[negate F]]_v=[[FNot (dualize F)]]_v). + case FBot . + the thesis becomes ([[ negate FBot ]]_v=[[ FNot (dualize FBot) ]]_v). + done. + case FTop . + the thesis becomes ([[ negate FTop ]]_v=[[ FNot (dualize FTop) ]]_v). + done. + case FAtom. + assume n : ℕ. + the thesis becomes ([[ negate (FAtom n) ]]_v=[[ FNot (dualize (FAtom n)) ]]_v). + done. + case FAnd. + assume f : Formula. + by induction hypothesis we know + ([[ negate f ]]_v=[[ FNot (dualize f) ]]_v) (H). + assume f1 : Formula. + by induction hypothesis we know + ([[ negate f1 ]]_v=[[ FNot (dualize f1) ]]_v) (H1). + the thesis becomes + ([[ negate (FAnd f f1) ]]_v=[[ FNot (dualize (FAnd f f1)) ]]_v). + the thesis becomes + (min [[ negate f ]]_v [[ negate f1 ]]_v=[[ FNot (dualize (FAnd f f1)) ]]_v). + conclude + (min [[ negate f ]]_v [[ negate f1 ]]_v) + = (min [[ FNot (dualize f) ]]_v [[ negate f1 ]]_v) by H. + = (min [[ FNot (dualize f) ]]_v [[ FNot (dualize f1) ]]_v) by H1. + = (min (1 - [[ dualize f ]]_v) (1 - [[ dualize f1 ]]_v)). + = (1 - (max [[ dualize f ]]_v [[ dualize f1 ]]_v)) by min_max. + done. + case FOr. + assume f : Formula. + by induction hypothesis we know + ([[ negate f ]]_v=[[ FNot (dualize f) ]]_v) (H). + assume f1 : Formula. + by induction hypothesis we know + ([[ negate f1 ]]_v=[[ FNot (dualize f1) ]]_v) (H1). + the thesis becomes + ([[ negate (FOr f f1) ]]_v=[[ FNot (dualize (FOr f f1)) ]]_v). + the thesis becomes + (max [[ negate f ]]_v [[ negate f1 ]]_v=[[ FNot (dualize (FOr f f1)) ]]_v). + conclude + (max [[ negate f ]]_v [[ negate f1 ]]_v) + = (max [[ FNot (dualize f) ]]_v [[ negate f1 ]]_v) by H. + = (max [[ FNot (dualize f) ]]_v [[ FNot (dualize f1) ]]_v) by H1. + = (max (1 - [[ dualize f ]]_v) (1 - [[ dualize f1 ]]_v)). + = (1 - (min [[ dualize f ]]_v [[ dualize f1 ]]_v)) by max_min. + done. + case FImpl. + assume f : Formula. + by induction hypothesis we know + ([[ negate f ]]_v=[[ FNot (dualize f) ]]_v) (H). + assume f1 : Formula. + by induction hypothesis we know + ([[ negate f1 ]]_v=[[ FNot (dualize f1) ]]_v) (H1). + the thesis becomes + ([[ negate (FImpl f f1) ]]_v=[[ FNot (dualize (FImpl f f1)) ]]_v). + the thesis becomes + (max (1 - [[ negate f ]]_v) [[ negate f1 ]]_v=[[ FNot (dualize (FImpl f f1)) ]]_v). + conclude + (max (1-[[ negate f ]]_v) [[ negate f1 ]]_v) + = (max (1-[[ FNot (dualize f) ]]_v) [[ negate f1 ]]_v) by H. + = (max (1-[[ FNot (dualize f) ]]_v) [[ FNot (dualize f1) ]]_v) by H1. + = (max (1 - [[ FNot (dualize f) ]]_v) (1 - [[ dualize f1 ]]_v)). + = (1 - (min [[ FNot (dualize f) ]]_v [[ dualize f1 ]]_v)) by max_min. + done. + case FNot. + assume f : Formula. + by induction hypothesis we know + ([[ negate f ]]_v=[[ FNot (dualize f) ]]_v) (H). + the thesis becomes + ([[ negate (FNot f) ]]_v=[[ FNot (dualize (FNot f)) ]]_v). + the thesis becomes + (1 - [[ negate f ]]_v=[[ FNot (dualize (FNot f)) ]]_v). + conclude (1 - [[ negate f ]]_v) = (1 - [[ FNot (dualize f) ]]_v) by H. + done. +qed. + + +(* +lemma not_inj : ∀F,G. FNot F ≡ FNot G → F ≡ G. +intros; intro v;lapply (H v) as K; +change in K with (1 - [[ F ]]_v = 1 - [[ G ]]_v); +cases (sem_bool F v);cases (sem_bool G v); rewrite > H1; rewrite > H2; +try reflexivity; rewrite > H1 in K; rewrite > H2 in K; simplify in K; +symmetry; assumption; +qed. +*) -axiom dualize2 : ∀F. FNot (dualize F) ≡ subst F. -[[ subst f ]]v = [[ f ]]_(1-v) -f=g -> subst f = subst g -not f = not g => f = g +theorem not_inj: + ∀F:Formula.∀G:Formula.FNot F ≡ FNot G→F ≡ G. + assume F:Formula. + assume G:Formula. + suppose (FNot F ≡ FNot G) (H). + the thesis becomes (F ≡ G). + the thesis becomes (∀v:ℕ→ℕ.[[ F ]]_v=[[ G ]]_v). + assume v:(ℕ→ℕ). + by H we proved ([[ FNot F ]]_v=[[ FNot G ]]_v) (H1). + by sem_bool we proved ([[ F ]]_v=O∨[[ F ]]_v=1) (H2). + by sem_bool we proved ([[ G ]]_v=O∨[[ G ]]_v=1) (H3). + we proceed by cases on H2 to prove ([[ F ]]_v=[[ G ]]_v). + case Left. + we proceed by cases on H3 to prove ([[ F ]]_v=[[ G ]]_v). + case Left. + done. + case Right. + conclude + ([[ F ]]_v) + = 0 by H4; + = (1 - 1). + = (1 - [[G]]_v) by H5. + = [[ FNot G ]]_v. + = [[ FNot F ]]_v by H1. + = (1 - [[F]]_v). + = (1 - 0) by H4. + = 1. + done. + case Right. + we proceed by cases on H3 to prove ([[ F ]]_v=[[ G ]]_v). + case Left. + conclude + ([[ F ]]_v) + = 1 by H4; + = (1 - 0). + = (1 - [[G]]_v) by H5. + = [[ FNot G ]]_v. + = [[ FNot F ]]_v by H1. + = (1 - [[F]]_v). + = (1 - 1) by H4. + = 0. + done. + case Right. + done. +qed. + +(* +theorem duality: ∀F1,F2. F1 ≡ F2 → dualize F1 ≡ dualize F2. +intros; apply not_inj; intro v; rewrite > (not_dualize_eq_negate ? v); +rewrite > (not_dualize_eq_negate ? v); apply (negate_fun ??? v); apply H; +qed. +*) -theorem dualize1: ∀F1,F2. F1 ≡ F2 → dualize F1 ≡ dualize F2. -intros; -cut (FNot F1 ≡ FNot F2); -. -cut (dualize (subst F1) ≡ dualize (subst F2)). -cut (subst (subst F1) ≡ subst (subst F2)). -dual f = dual (subst subst f) - = (dual subst) (subst f) - = not (subst f) - = +theorem duality: + ∀F1:Formula.∀F2:Formula.F1 ≡ F2→dualize F1 ≡ dualize F2. + assume F1:Formula. + assume F2:Formula. + suppose (F1 ≡ F2) (H). + the thesis becomes (dualize F1 ≡ dualize F2). + by negate_fun we proved (negate F1 ≡ negate F2) (H1). + by not_dualize_eq_negate, equiv_rewrite we proved (FNot (dualize F1) ≡ negate F2) (H2). + by not_dualize_eq_negate, equiv_rewrite we proved (FNot (dualize F1) ≡ FNot (dualize F2)) (H3). + by not_inj we proved (dualize F1 ≡ dualize F2) (H4). + done. +qed. \ No newline at end of file