Added something to Myhill.thy, trying to explain the relationship between finite automata and language partition.
\documentclass{llncs}
\usepackage{isabelle}
\usepackage{isabellesym}
\usepackage{amsmath}
\usepackage{amssymb}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usepackage{pgf}
\usepackage{pdfsetup}
\usepackage{ot1patch}
\usepackage{times}
\usepackage{proof}
\usepackage{stmaryrd}
\urlstyle{rm}
\isabellestyle{it}
\renewcommand{\isastyleminor}{\it}%
\renewcommand{\isastyle}{\normalsize\it}%
\def\dn{\,\stackrel{\mbox{\scriptsize def}}{=}\,}
\renewcommand{\isasymequiv}{$\dn$}
\renewcommand{\isasymemptyset}{$\varnothing$}
\renewcommand{\isacharunderscore}{\mbox{$\_\!\_$}}
\begin{document}
\title{A Formalisation of the Myhill-Nerode Theorem\\ based on Regular
Expressions (Proof Pearl)}
\author{Chunhan Wu\inst{1} \and Xingjuan Zhang\inst{1} \and Christian Urban\inst{2}}
\institute{PLA University, China \and TU Munich, Germany}
\maketitle
\begin{abstract}
There are numerous textbooks on regular languages. Nearly all of them
introduce the subject by describing finite automata and
only mentioning on the side a connection with regular expressions.
Unfortunately, automata are a hassle for formalisations in HOL-based
theorem provers. The reason is that they need to be represented as graphs
or matrices, neither of which can be defined as inductive datatype. Also
operations, such as disjoint unions of graphs, are not easily formalisiable
in HOL. In contrast, regular expressions can be defined conveniently
as datatype and a corresponding reasoning infrastructure comes for
free. We show in this paper that a central result from formal
language theory---the Myhill-Nerode theorem---can be recreated
using only regular expressions.
\end{abstract}
\input{session}
\bibliographystyle{plain}
\bibliography{root}
\end{document}
%%% Local Variables:
%%% mode: latex
%%% TeX-master: t
%%% End: