theory Lsp
imports Main
begin
fun lsp :: "('a \<Rightarrow> ('b::linorder)) \<Rightarrow> 'a list \<Rightarrow> ('a list \<times> 'a list \<times> 'a list)"
where
"lsp f [] = ([], [], [])" |
"lsp f [x] = ([], [x], [])" |
"lsp f (x#xs) = (case (lsp f xs) of
(l, [], r) \<Rightarrow> ([], [x], []) |
(l, y#ys, r) \<Rightarrow> if f x \<ge> f y then ([], [x], xs) else (x#l, y#ys, r))"
inductive lsp_p :: "('a \<Rightarrow> ('b::linorder)) \<Rightarrow> 'a list \<Rightarrow> ('a list \<times> 'a list \<times> 'a list) \<Rightarrow> bool"
for f :: "('a \<Rightarrow> ('b::linorder))"
where
lsp_nil [intro]: "lsp_p f [] ([], [], [])" |
lsp_single [intro]: "lsp_p f [x] ([], [x], [])" |
lsp_cons_1 [intro]: "\<lbrakk>xs \<noteq> []; lsp_p f xs (l, [m], r); f x \<ge> f m\<rbrakk> \<Longrightarrow> lsp_p f (x#xs) ([], [x], xs)" |
lsp_cons_2 [intro]: "\<lbrakk>xs \<noteq> []; lsp_p f xs (l, [m], r); f x < f m\<rbrakk> \<Longrightarrow> lsp_p f (x#xs) (x#l, [m], r)"
lemma lsp_p_lsp_1: "lsp_p f x y \<Longrightarrow> y = lsp f x"
proof (induct rule:lsp_p.induct)
case (lsp_cons_1 xs l m r x)
assume lsp_xs [symmetric]: "(l, [m], r) = lsp f xs"
and le_mx: "f m \<le> f x"
show ?case (is "?L = ?R")
proof(cases xs, simp)
case (Cons v vs)
show ?thesis
apply (simp add:Cons)
apply (fold Cons)
by (simp add:lsp_xs le_mx)
qed
next
case (lsp_cons_2 xs l m r x)
assume lsp_xs [symmetric]: "(l, [m], r) = lsp f xs"
and lt_xm: "f x < f m"
show ?case (is "?L = ?R")
proof(cases xs)
case (Cons v vs)
show ?thesis
apply (simp add:Cons)
apply (fold Cons)
apply (simp add:lsp_xs)
by (insert lt_xm, auto)
next
case Nil
from prems show ?thesis by simp
qed
qed auto
lemma lsp_mid_nil: "lsp f xs = (a, [], c) \<Longrightarrow> xs = []"
apply (induct xs arbitrary:a c, auto)
apply (case_tac xs, auto)
by (case_tac "(lsp f (ab # list))", auto split:if_splits list.splits)
lemma lsp_mid_length: "lsp f x = (u, v, w) \<Longrightarrow> length v \<le> 1"
proof(induct x arbitrary:u v w, simp)
case (Cons x xs)
assume ih: "\<And> u v w. lsp f xs = (u, v, w) \<Longrightarrow> length v \<le> 1"
and h: "lsp f (x # xs) = (u, v, w)"
show "length v \<le> 1" using h
proof(cases xs, simp add:h)
case (Cons z zs)
assume eq_xs: "xs = z # zs"
show ?thesis
proof(cases "lsp f xs")
fix l m r
assume eq_lsp: "lsp f xs = (l, m, r)"
show ?thesis
proof(cases m)
case Nil
from Nil and eq_lsp have "lsp f xs = (l, [], r)" by simp
from lsp_mid_nil [OF this] have "xs = []" .
with h show ?thesis by auto
next
case (Cons y ys)
assume eq_m: "m = y # ys"
from ih [OF eq_lsp] have eq_xs_1: "length m \<le> 1" .
show ?thesis
proof(cases "f x \<ge> f y")
case True
from eq_xs eq_xs_1 True h eq_lsp show ?thesis
by (auto split:list.splits if_splits)
next
case False
from eq_xs eq_xs_1 False h eq_lsp show ?thesis
by (auto split:list.splits if_splits)
qed
qed
qed
next
assume "[] = u \<and> [x] = v \<and> [] = w"
hence "v = [x]" by simp
thus "length v \<le> Suc 0" by simp
qed
qed
lemma lsp_p_lsp_2: "lsp_p f x (lsp f x)"
proof(induct x, auto)
case (Cons x xs)
assume ih: "lsp_p f xs (lsp f xs)"
show ?case
proof(cases xs)
case Nil
thus ?thesis by auto
next
case (Cons v vs)
show ?thesis
proof(cases "xs")
case Nil
thus ?thesis by auto
next
case (Cons v vs)
assume eq_xs: "xs = v # vs"
show ?thesis
proof(cases "lsp f xs")
fix l m r
assume eq_lsp_xs: "lsp f xs = (l, m, r)"
show ?thesis
proof(cases m)
case Nil
from eq_lsp_xs and Nil have "lsp f xs = (l, [], r)" by simp
from lsp_mid_nil [OF this] have eq_xs: "xs = []" .
hence "lsp f (x#xs) = ([], [x], [])" by simp
with eq_xs show ?thesis by auto
next
case (Cons y ys)
assume eq_m: "m = y # ys"
show ?thesis
proof(cases "f x \<ge> f y")
case True
from eq_xs eq_lsp_xs Cons True
have eq_lsp: "lsp f (x#xs) = ([], [x], v # vs)" by simp
show ?thesis
proof (simp add:eq_lsp)
show "lsp_p f (x # xs) ([], [x], v # vs)"
proof(fold eq_xs, rule lsp_cons_1 [OF _])
from eq_xs show "xs \<noteq> []" by simp
next
from lsp_mid_length [OF eq_lsp_xs] and Cons
have "m = [y]" by simp
with eq_lsp_xs have "lsp f xs = (l, [y], r)" by simp
with ih show "lsp_p f xs (l, [y], r)" by simp
next
from True show "f y \<le> f x" by simp
qed
qed
next
case False
from eq_xs eq_lsp_xs Cons False
have eq_lsp: "lsp f (x#xs) = (x # l, y # ys, r) " by simp
show ?thesis
proof (simp add:eq_lsp)
from lsp_mid_length [OF eq_lsp_xs] and eq_m
have "ys = []" by simp
moreover have "lsp_p f (x # xs) (x # l, [y], r)"
proof(rule lsp_cons_2)
from eq_xs show "xs \<noteq> []" by simp
next
from lsp_mid_length [OF eq_lsp_xs] and Cons
have "m = [y]" by simp
with eq_lsp_xs have "lsp f xs = (l, [y], r)" by simp
with ih show "lsp_p f xs (l, [y], r)" by simp
next
from False show "f x < f y" by simp
qed
ultimately show "lsp_p f (x # xs) (x # l, y # ys, r)" by simp
qed
qed
qed
qed
qed
qed
qed
lemma lsp_induct:
fixes f x1 x2 P
assumes h: "lsp f x1 = x2"
and p1: "P [] ([], [], [])"
and p2: "\<And>x. P [x] ([], [x], [])"
and p3: "\<And>xs l m r x. \<lbrakk>xs \<noteq> []; lsp f xs = (l, [m], r); P xs (l, [m], r); f m \<le> f x\<rbrakk> \<Longrightarrow> P (x # xs) ([], [x], xs)"
and p4: "\<And>xs l m r x. \<lbrakk>xs \<noteq> []; lsp f xs = (l, [m], r); P xs (l, [m], r); f x < f m\<rbrakk> \<Longrightarrow> P (x # xs) (x # l, [m], r)"
shows "P x1 x2"
proof(rule lsp_p.induct)
from lsp_p_lsp_2 and h
show "lsp_p f x1 x2" by metis
next
from p1 show "P [] ([], [], [])" by metis
next
from p2 show "\<And>x. P [x] ([], [x], [])" by metis
next
fix xs l m r x
assume h1: "xs \<noteq> []" and h2: "lsp_p f xs (l, [m], r)" and h3: "P xs (l, [m], r)" and h4: "f m \<le> f x"
show "P (x # xs) ([], [x], xs)"
proof(rule p3 [OF h1 _ h3 h4])
from h2 and lsp_p_lsp_1 show "lsp f xs = (l, [m], r)" by metis
qed
next
fix xs l m r x
assume h1: "xs \<noteq> []" and h2: "lsp_p f xs (l, [m], r)" and h3: "P xs (l, [m], r)" and h4: "f x < f m"
show "P (x # xs) (x # l, [m], r)"
proof(rule p4 [OF h1 _ h3 h4])
from h2 and lsp_p_lsp_1 show "lsp f xs = (l, [m], r)" by metis
qed
qed
lemma lsp_set_eq:
fixes f x u v w
assumes h: "lsp f x = (u, v, w)"
shows "x = u@v@w"
proof -
have "\<And> f x r. lsp f x = r \<Longrightarrow> \<forall> u v w. (r = (u, v, w) \<longrightarrow> x = u@v@w)"
by (erule lsp_induct, simp+)
from this [rule_format, OF h] show ?thesis by simp
qed
lemma lsp_set:
assumes h: "(u, v, w) = lsp f x"
shows "set (u@v@w) = set x"
proof -
from lsp_set_eq [OF h[symmetric]]
show ?thesis by simp
qed
lemma max_insert_gt:
fixes S fx
assumes h: "fx < Max S"
and np: "S \<noteq> {}"
and fn: "finite S"
shows "Max S = Max (insert fx S)"
proof -
from Max_insert [OF fn np]
have "Max (insert fx S) = max fx (Max S)" .
moreover have "\<dots> = Max S"
proof(cases "fx \<le> Max S")
case False
with h
show ?thesis by (simp add:max_def)
next
case True
thus ?thesis by (simp add:max_def)
qed
ultimately show ?thesis by simp
qed
lemma max_insert_le:
fixes S fx
assumes h: "Max S \<le> fx"
and fn: "finite S"
shows "fx = Max (insert fx S)"
proof(cases "S = {}")
case True
thus ?thesis by simp
next
case False
from Max_insert [OF fn False]
have "Max (insert fx S) = max fx (Max S)" .
moreover have "\<dots> = fx"
proof(cases "fx \<le> Max S")
case False
thus ?thesis by (simp add:max_def)
next
case True
have hh: "\<And> x y. \<lbrakk> x \<le> (y::('a::linorder)); y \<le> x\<rbrakk> \<Longrightarrow> x = y" by auto
from hh [OF True h]
have "fx = Max S" .
thus ?thesis by simp
qed
ultimately show ?thesis by simp
qed
lemma lsp_max:
fixes f x u m w
assumes h: "lsp f x = (u, [m], w)"
shows "f m = Max (f ` (set x))"
proof -
{ fix y
have "lsp f x = y \<Longrightarrow> \<forall> u m w. y = (u, [m], w) \<longrightarrow> f m = Max (f ` (set x))"
proof(erule lsp_induct, simp)
{ fix x u m w
assume "(([]::'a list), ([x]::'a list), ([]::'a list)) = (u, [m], w)"
hence "f m = Max (f ` set [x])" by simp
} thus "\<And>x. \<forall>u m w. ([], [x], []) = (u, [m], w) \<longrightarrow> f m = Max (f ` set [x])" by simp
next
fix xs l m r x
assume h1: "xs \<noteq> []"
and h2: " lsp f xs = (l, [m], r)"
and h3: "\<forall>u ma w. (l, [m], r) = (u, [ma], w) \<longrightarrow> f ma = Max (f ` set xs)"
and h4: "f m \<le> f x"
show " \<forall>u m w. ([], [x], xs) = (u, [m], w) \<longrightarrow> f m = Max (f ` set (x # xs))"
proof -
have "f x = Max (f ` set (x # xs))"
proof -
from h2 h3 have "f m = Max (f ` set xs)" by simp
with h4 show ?thesis
apply auto
by (rule_tac max_insert_le, auto)
qed
thus ?thesis by simp
qed
next
fix xs l m r x
assume h1: "xs \<noteq> []"
and h2: " lsp f xs = (l, [m], r)"
and h3: " \<forall>u ma w. (l, [m], r) = (u, [ma], w) \<longrightarrow> f ma = Max (f ` set xs)"
and h4: "f x < f m"
show "\<forall>u ma w. (x # l, [m], r) = (u, [ma], w) \<longrightarrow> f ma = Max (f ` set (x # xs))"
proof -
from h2 h3 have "f m = Max (f ` set xs)" by simp
with h4
have "f m = Max (f ` set (x # xs))"
apply auto
apply (rule_tac max_insert_gt, simp+)
by (insert h1, simp+)
thus ?thesis by auto
qed
qed
} with h show ?thesis by metis
qed
end