diff -r 3e19073e91f4 -r 4aabb0629e4b ChengsongTanPhdThesis/Chapters/Bitcoded2.tex
--- a/ChengsongTanPhdThesis/Chapters/Bitcoded2.tex	Mon Aug 22 17:58:29 2022 +0100
+++ b/ChengsongTanPhdThesis/Chapters/Bitcoded2.tex	Tue Aug 23 14:21:13 2022 +0100
@@ -11,8 +11,20 @@
 
 
 
-Now we introduce the simplifications, which is why we introduce the 
-bitcodes in the first place.
+In this chapter we introduce the simplifications
+on annotated regular expressions that can be applied to 
+each intermediate derivative result. This allows
+us to make $\blexer$ much more efficient.
+We contrast this simplification function 
+with Sulzmann and Lu's original
+simplifications, indicating the simplicity of our algorithm and
+improvements we made, demostrating
+the usefulness and reliability of formal proofs on algorithms.
+These ``aggressive'' simplifications would not be possible in the injection-based 
+lexing we introduced in chapter \ref{Inj}.
+We then go on to prove the correctness with the improved version of 
+$\blexer$, called $\blexersimp$, by establishing 
+$\blexer \; r \; s= \blexersimp \; r \; s$ using a term rewriting system.
 
 \section{Simplification for Annotated Regular Expressions}
 The first thing we notice in the fast growth of examples such as $(a^*a^*)^*$'s
@@ -21,14 +33,15 @@
 de-duplication at different levels:
 \begin{center}
 	$(a^*a^*)^* \rightarrow (a^*a^* + a^*)\cdot(a^*a^*)^* \rightarrow $\\
-	$((a^*a^* + a^*) + a^*)\cdot(a^*a^*)^* + (a^*a^* + a^*)\cdot(a^*a^*)^*$
+	$((a^*a^* + a^*) + a^*)\cdot(a^*a^*)^* + (a^*a^* + a^*)\cdot(a^*a^*)^* \rightarrow \ldots$
 \end{center}
 \noindent
 As we have already mentioned in \ref{eqn:growth2},
 a simple-minded simplification function cannot simplify
+\begin{center}
 $((a^*a^* + a^*) + a^*)\cdot(a^*a^*)^* + (a^*a^* + a^*)\cdot(a^*a^*)^*$
-any further.
-we would expect a better simplification function to work in the 
+\end{center}
+any further, one would expect a better simplification function to work in the 
 following way:
 \begin{gather*}
 	((a^*a^* + \underbrace{a^*}_\text{A})+\underbrace{a^*}_\text{duplicate of A})\cdot(a^*a^*)^* + 
@@ -40,7 +53,10 @@
 	\bigg\downarrow \\
 	(a^*a^* + a^* 
 	)\cdot(a^*a^*)^*  
-	\color{gray} + (a^*a^* + a^*) \cdot(a^*a^*)^*
+	\color{gray} + (a^*a^* + a^*) \cdot(a^*a^*)^*\\
+	\bigg\downarrow \\
+	(a^*a^* + a^* 
+	)\cdot(a^*a^*)^*  
 \end{gather*}
 \noindent
 This motivating example came from testing Sulzmann and Lu's 
@@ -82,16 +98,6 @@
 		$\zeroable\;_{bs}\ZERO$ & $\dn$ & $\textit{true}$
 	\end{tabular}
 \end{center}
-%\[
-%\begin{aligned}
-%&\textit{isPhi} \left(b s @ r i^{*}\right)=\text { False } \\
-%&\textit{isPhi}\left(b s @ r i_{1} r i_{2}\right)=\textit{isPhi}  r i_{1} \vee \textit{isPhi}  r i_{2} \\
-%&\textit{isPhi} \left(b s @ r i_{1} \oplus r i_{2}\right)=\textit{isPhi}  r i_{1} \wedge \textit{isPhi}  r i_{2} \\
-%&\textit{isPhi}(b s @ l)= False \\
-%&\textit{isPhi}(b s @ \epsilon)= False \\
-%&\textit{isPhi} \; \ZERO = True
-%\end{aligned}
-%\]
 \noindent
 Despite that we have already implemented the simple-minded simplifications 
 such as throwing away useless $\ONE$s and $\ZERO$s.