--- a/Pearl-jv/Paper.thy Sun Apr 11 22:01:56 2010 +0200
+++ b/Pearl-jv/Paper.thy Sun Apr 11 22:47:45 2010 +0200
@@ -214,15 +214,18 @@
simple formalisation of the nominal logic work.\smallskip
\noindent
- {\bf Contributions of the paper:} Our use of a single atom type for representing
- atoms of different sorts and of functions for representing
- permutations is not novel, but drastically reduces the number of type classes to just
- two (permutation types and finitely supported types) that we need in order
- reason abstractly about properties from the nominal logic work. The novel
- technical contribution of this paper is a mechanism for dealing with
+ {\bf Contributions of the paper:} Using a single atom type to represent
+ atoms of different sorts and representing permutations as functions are not
+ new ideas. The main contribution of this paper is to show an example of how
+ to make better theorem proving tools by choosing the right level of
+ abstraction for the underlying theory---our design choices take advantage of
+ Isabelle's type system, type classes, and reasoning infrastructure.
+ The novel
+ technical contribution is a mechanism for dealing with
``Church-style'' lambda-terms \cite{Church40} and HOL-based languages
\cite{PittsHOL4} where variables and variable binding depend on type
annotations.
+
*}
section {* Sorted Atoms and Sort-Respecting Permutations *}
@@ -338,7 +341,7 @@
are \emph{equal}. We do not have to use the equivalence relation shown
in~\eqref{permequ} to identify them, as we would if they had been represented
as lists of pairs. Another advantage of the function representation is that
- they form an (additive non-commutative) group provided we define
+ they form a (non-commutative) group provided we define
\begin{isabelle}\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ %%%
\begin{tabular}{@ {}l}
@@ -363,9 +366,9 @@
\noindent
Again this is in contrast to the list-of-pairs representation which does not
- form a group. The technical importance of this fact is that for groups we
- can rely on Isabelle/HOL's rich simplification infrastructure. This will
- come in handy when we have to do calculations with permutations.
+ form a group. The technical importance of this fact is that we can rely on
+ Isabelle/HOL's existing simplification infrastructure for groups, which will
+ come in handy when we have to do calculations with permutations.
Note that Isabelle/HOL defies standard conventions of mathematical notation
by using additive syntax even for non-commutative groups. Obviously,
composition of permutations is not commutative in general, because @{text
@@ -500,11 +503,13 @@
text {*
- One huge advantage of using bijective permutation functions (as opposed to
- non-bijective renaming substitutions employed in traditional works syntax) is
- the property of \emph{equivariance}
- and the fact that most HOL-functions (this includes constants) whose argument
- and result types are permutation types satisfy this property:
+ An \emph{equivariant} function or predicate is one that is invariant under
+ the swapping of atoms. Having a notion of equivariance with nice logical
+ properties is a major advantage of bijective permutations over traditional
+ renaming substitutions \cite[\S2]{Pitts03}. Equivariance can be defined
+ uniformly for all permutation types, and it is satisfied by most HOL
+ functions and constants.
+
\begin{definition}\label{equivariance}
A function @{text f} is \emph{equivariant} if @{term "\<forall>\<pi>. \<pi> \<bullet> f = f"}.
@@ -741,7 +746,7 @@
provided @{thm (prem 1) finite_supp_unique[no_vars]},
@{thm (prem 2) finite_supp_unique[no_vars]}, and for
all @{text "a \<in> S"} and all @{text "b \<notin> S"}, with @{text a}
- and @{text b} having the same sort, then \mbox{@{term "(a \<rightleftharpoons> b) \<bullet> x \<noteq> x"}}
+ and @{text b} having the same sort, \mbox{@{term "(a \<rightleftharpoons> b) \<bullet> x \<noteq> x"}}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
@@ -1154,9 +1159,9 @@
user just needs to specify \isacommand{atom\_decl}~~@{text "var (ty)"}
where the argument, or arguments, are datatypes for which we can automatically
define an injective function like @{text "sort_ty"} (see \eqref{sortty}).
- Our hope is that with this approach Benzmueller and Paulson, the authors of
- \cite{PaulsonBenzmueller}, can make headway with formalising their results
- about simple type theory.
+ Our hope is that with this approach Benzmueller and Paulson can make
+ headway with formalising their results
+ about simple type theory \cite{PaulsonBenzmueller}.
Because of its limitations, they did not attempt this with the old version
of Nominal Isabelle. We also hope we can make progress with formalisations of
HOL-based languages.
@@ -1201,7 +1206,7 @@
zero to return zero.
We noticed only one disadvantage of the permutations-as-functions: Over
- lists we can easily perform inductions. For permutation made up from
+ lists we can easily perform inductions. For permutations made up from
functions, we have to manually derive an appropriate induction principle. We
can establish such a principle, but we have no real experience yet whether ours
is the most useful principle: such an induction principle was not needed in