(*<*)
theory Paper
imports "Quotient"
"LaTeXsugar"
begin
notation (latex output)
rel_conj ("_ OOO _" [53, 53] 52)
and
fun_map ("_ ---> _" [51, 51] 50)
and
fun_rel ("_ ===> _" [51, 51] 50)
ML {*
fun nth_conj n (_, r) = nth (HOLogic.dest_conj r) n;
fun style_lhs_rhs proj = Scan.succeed (fn ctxt => fn t =>
let
val concl =
Object_Logic.drop_judgment (ProofContext.theory_of ctxt) (Logic.strip_imp_concl t)
in
case concl of (_ $ l $ r) => proj (l, r)
| _ => error ("Binary operator expected in term: " ^ Syntax.string_of_term ctxt concl)
end);
*}
setup {*
Term_Style.setup "rhs1" (style_lhs_rhs (nth_conj 0)) #>
Term_Style.setup "rhs2" (style_lhs_rhs (nth_conj 1)) #>
Term_Style.setup "rhs3" (style_lhs_rhs (nth_conj 2))
*}
(*>*)
section {* Introduction *}
text {*
{\hfill quote by Larry}\bigskip
\noindent
Isabelle is a generic theorem prover in which many logics can be implemented.
The most widely used one, however, is
Higher-Order Logic (HOL). This logic consists of a small number of
axioms and inference
rules over a simply-typed term-language. Safe reasoning in HOL is ensured by two very restricted
mechanisms for extending the logic: one is the definition of new constants
in terms of existing ones; the other is the introduction of new types
by identifying non-empty subsets in existing types. It is well understood
to use both mechanism for dealing with quotient constructions in HOL (cite Larry).
For example the integers in Isabelle/HOL are constructed by a quotient construction over
the type @{typ "nat \<times> nat"} and the equivalence relation
% I would avoid substraction for natural numbers.
@{text [display] "(n\<^isub>1, n\<^isub>2) \<approx> (m\<^isub>1, m\<^isub>2) \<equiv> n\<^isub>1 - n \<^isub>2 = m\<^isub>1 - m \<^isub>2"}
\noindent
Similarly one can construct the type of finite sets by quotienting lists
according to the equivalence relation
@{text [display] "xs \<approx> ys \<equiv> (\<forall>x. x \<in> xs \<longleftrightarrow> x \<in> ys)"}
\noindent
where @{text "\<in>"} stands for membership in a list.
The problem is that in order to start reasoning about, for example integers,
definitions and theorems need to be transferred, or \emph{lifted},
from the ``raw'' type @{typ "nat \<times> nat"} to the quotient type @{typ int}.
This lifting usually requires a lot of tedious reasoning effort.
The purpose of a \emph{quotient package} is to ease the lifting and automate
the reasoning involved as much as possible. Such a package is a central
component of the new version of Nominal Isabelle where representations
of alpha-equated terms are constructed according to specifications given by
the user.
In the context of HOL, there have been several quotient packages (...). The
most notable is the one by Homeier (...) implemented in HOL4. However, what is
surprising, none of them can deal compositions of quotients, for example with
lifting theorems about @{text "concat"}:
@{text [display] "concat definition"}
\noindent
One would like to lift this definition to the operation
@{text [display] "union definition"}
\noindent
What is special about this operation is that we have as input
lists of lists which after lifting turn into finite sets of finite
sets.
*}
subsection {* Contributions *}
text {*
We present the detailed lifting procedure, which was not shown before.
The quotient package presented in this paper has the following
advantages over existing packages:
\begin{itemize}
\item We define quotient composition, function map composition and
relation map composition. This lets lifting polymorphic types with
subtypes quotiented as well. We extend the notions of
respectfullness and preservation to cope with quotient
composition.
\item We allow lifting only some occurrences of quotiented
types. Rsp/Prs extended. (used in nominal)
\item The quotient package is very modular. Definitions can be added
separately, rsp and prs can be proved separately and theorems can
be lifted on a need basis. (useful with type-classes).
\item Can be used both manually (attribute, separate tactics,
rsp/prs databases) and programatically (automated definition of
lifted constants, the rsp proof obligations and theorem statement
translation according to given quotients).
\end{itemize}
*}
section {* Quotient Type*}
text {*
In this section we present the definitions of a quotient that follow
those by Homeier, the proofs can be found there.
\begin{definition}[Quotient]
A relation $R$ with an abstraction function $Abs$
and a representation function $Rep$ is a \emph{quotient}
if and only if:
\begin{enumerate}
\item @{thm (rhs1) Quotient_def[of "R", no_vars]}
\item @{thm (rhs2) Quotient_def[of "R", no_vars]}
\item @{thm (rhs3) Quotient_def[of "R", no_vars]}
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}[Relation map and function map]
@{thm fun_rel_def[no_vars]}\\
@{thm fun_map_def[no_vars]}
\end{definition}
The main theorems for building higher order quotients is:
\begin{lemma}[Function Quotient]
If @{thm (prem 1) fun_quotient[no_vars]} and @{thm (prem 2) fun_quotient[no_vars]}
then @{thm (concl) fun_quotient[no_vars]}
\end{lemma}
*}
section {* Constants *}
(* Describe what containers are? *)
text {*
\begin{definition}[Composition of Relations]
@{abbrev "rel_conj R1 R2"}
\end{definition}
The first operation that we describe is the generation of
aggregate Abs or Rep function for two given compound types.
This operation will be used for the constant defnitions
and for the translation of theorems statements. It relies on
knowing map functions and relation functions for container types.
It follows the following algorithm:
\begin{itemize}
\item For equal types or free type variables return identity.
\item For function types recurse, change the Rep/Abs flag to
the opposite one for the domain type and compose the
results with @{term "fun_map"}.
\item For equal type constructors use the appropriate map function
applied to the results for the arguments.
\item For unequal type constructors are unequal, we look in the
quotients information for a raw type quotient type pair that
matches the given types. We apply the environment to the arguments
and recurse composing it with the aggregate map function.
\end{itemize}
Rsp and Prs
*}
section {* Lifting Theorems *}
text {* TBD *}
text {* Why providing a statement to prove is necessary is some cases *}
subsection {* Regularization *}
text {*
Transformation of the theorem statement:
\begin{itemize}
\item Quantifiers and abstractions involving raw types replaced by bounded ones.
\item Equalities involving raw types replaced by bounded ones.
\end{itemize}
The procedure.
Example of non-regularizable theorem ($0 = 1$).
Separtion of regularization from injection thanks to the following 2 lemmas:
\begin{lemma}
If @{term R2} is an equivalence relation, then:
\begin{eqnarray}
@{thm (rhs) ball_reg_eqv_range[no_vars]} & = & @{thm (lhs) ball_reg_eqv_range[no_vars]}\\
@{thm (rhs) bex_reg_eqv_range[no_vars]} & = & @{thm (lhs) bex_reg_eqv_range[no_vars]}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{lemma}
*}
subsection {* Injection *}
subsection {* Cleaning *}
text {* Preservation of quantifiers, abstractions, relations, quotient-constants
(definitions) and user given constant preservation lemmas *}
section {* Examples *}
section {* Related Work *}
text {*
\begin{itemize}
\item Peter Homeier's package~\cite{Homeier05} (and related work from there)
\item John Harrison's one~\cite{harrison-thesis} is the first one to lift theorems
but only first order.
\item PVS~\cite{PVS:Interpretations}
\item MetaPRL~\cite{Nogin02}
\item Manually defined quotients in Isabelle/HOL Library (Markus's Quotient\_Type,
Dixon's FSet, \ldots)
\item Oscar Slotosch defines quotient-type automatically but no
lifting~\cite{Slotosch97}.
\item PER. And how to avoid it.
\item Necessity of Hilbert Choice op and Larry's quotients~\cite{Paulson06}
\item Setoids in Coq and \cite{ChicliPS02}
\end{itemize}
*}
(*<*)
end
(*>*)