summary |
shortlog |
changelog |
graph |
tags |
branches |
files |
changeset |
file |
revisions |
annotate |
diff |
raw

doc-src/Ref/simp.tex

author | wenzelm |

Mon Aug 28 13:52:38 2000 +0200 (2000-08-28) | |

changeset 9695 | ec7d7f877712 |

parent 1100 | 74921c7613e7 |

child 11181 | d04f57b91166 |

permissions | -rw-r--r-- |

proper setup of iman.sty/extra.sty/ttbox.sty;

1 %%%THIS DOCUMENTS THE OBSOLETE SIMPLIFIER!!!!

2 \chapter{Simplification} \label{simp-chap}

3 \index{simplification|(}

4 Object-level rewriting is not primitive in Isabelle. For efficiency,

5 perhaps it ought to be. On the other hand, it is difficult to conceive of

6 a general mechanism that could accommodate the diversity of rewriting found

7 in different logics. Hence rewriting in Isabelle works via resolution,

8 using unknowns as place-holders for simplified terms. This chapter

9 describes a generic simplification package, the functor~\ttindex{SimpFun},

10 which expects the basic laws of equational logic and returns a suite of

11 simplification tactics. The code lives in

12 \verb$Provers/simp.ML$.

14 This rewriting package is not as general as one might hope (using it for {\tt

15 HOL} is not quite as convenient as it could be; rewriting modulo equations is

16 not supported~\ldots) but works well for many logics. It performs

17 conditional and unconditional rewriting and handles multiple reduction

18 relations and local assumptions. It also has a facility for automatic case

19 splits by expanding conditionals like {\it if-then-else\/} during rewriting.

21 For many of Isabelle's logics ({\tt FOL}, {\tt ZF}, {\tt LCF} and {\tt HOL})

22 the simplifier has been set up already. Hence we start by describing the

23 functions provided by the simplifier --- those functions exported by

24 \ttindex{SimpFun} through its result signature \ttindex{SIMP} shown in

25 Fig.\ts\ref{SIMP}.

28 \section{Simplification sets}

29 \index{simplification sets}

30 The simplification tactics are controlled by {\bf simpsets}, which consist of

31 three things:

32 \begin{enumerate}

33 \item {\bf Rewrite rules}, which are theorems like

34 $\Var{m} + succ(\Var{n}) = succ(\Var{m} + \Var{n})$. {\bf Conditional}

35 rewrites such as $m<n \Imp m/n = 0$ are permitted.

36 \index{rewrite rules}

38 \item {\bf Congruence rules}, which typically have the form

39 \index{congruence rules}

40 \[ \List{\Var{x@1} = \Var{y@1}; \ldots; \Var{x@n} = \Var{y@n}} \Imp

41 f(\Var{x@1},\ldots,\Var{x@n}) = f(\Var{y@1},\ldots,\Var{y@n}).

42 \]

44 \item The {\bf auto-tactic}, which attempts to solve the simplified

45 subgoal, say by recognizing it as a tautology.

46 \end{enumerate}

48 \subsection{Congruence rules}

49 Congruence rules enable the rewriter to simplify subterms. Without a

50 congruence rule for the function~$g$, no argument of~$g$ can be rewritten.

51 Congruence rules can be generalized in the following ways:

53 {\bf Additional assumptions} are allowed:

54 \[ \List{\Var{P@1} \bimp \Var{Q@1};\; \Var{Q@1} \Imp \Var{P@2} \bimp \Var{Q@2}}

55 \Imp (\Var{P@1} \imp \Var{P@2}) \bimp (\Var{Q@1} \imp \Var{Q@2})

56 \]

57 This rule assumes $Q@1$, and any rewrite rules it contains, while

58 simplifying~$P@2$. Such `local' assumptions are effective for rewriting

59 formulae such as $x=0\imp y+x=y$.

61 {\bf Additional quantifiers} are allowed, typically for binding operators:

62 \[ \List{\Forall z. \Var{P}(z) \bimp \Var{Q}(z)} \Imp

63 \forall x.\Var{P}(x) \bimp \forall x.\Var{Q}(x)

64 \]

66 {\bf Different equalities} can be mixed. The following example

67 enables the transition from formula rewriting to term rewriting:

68 \[ \List{\Var{x@1}=\Var{y@1};\Var{x@2}=\Var{y@2}} \Imp

69 (\Var{x@1}=\Var{x@2}) \bimp (\Var{y@1}=\Var{y@2})

70 \]

71 \begin{warn}

72 It is not necessary to assert a separate congruence rule for each constant,

73 provided your logic contains suitable substitution rules. The function {\tt

74 mk_congs} derives congruence rules from substitution

75 rules~\S\ref{simp-tactics}.

76 \end{warn}

79 \begin{figure}

80 \indexbold{*SIMP}

81 \begin{ttbox}

82 infix 4 addrews addcongs delrews delcongs setauto;

83 signature SIMP =

84 sig

85 type simpset

86 val empty_ss : simpset

87 val addcongs : simpset * thm list -> simpset

88 val addrews : simpset * thm list -> simpset

89 val delcongs : simpset * thm list -> simpset

90 val delrews : simpset * thm list -> simpset

91 val print_ss : simpset -> unit

92 val setauto : simpset * (int -> tactic) -> simpset

93 val ASM_SIMP_CASE_TAC : simpset -> int -> tactic

94 val ASM_SIMP_TAC : simpset -> int -> tactic

95 val CASE_TAC : simpset -> int -> tactic

96 val SIMP_CASE2_TAC : simpset -> int -> tactic

97 val SIMP_THM : simpset -> thm -> thm

98 val SIMP_TAC : simpset -> int -> tactic

99 val SIMP_CASE_TAC : simpset -> int -> tactic

100 val mk_congs : theory -> string list -> thm list

101 val mk_typed_congs : theory -> (string*string) list -> thm list

102 val tracing : bool ref

103 end;

104 \end{ttbox}

105 \caption{The signature {\tt SIMP}} \label{SIMP}

106 \end{figure}

109 \subsection{The abstract type {\tt simpset}}\label{simp-simpsets}

110 Simpsets are values of the abstract type \ttindexbold{simpset}. They are

111 manipulated by the following functions:

112 \index{simplification sets|bold}

113 \begin{ttdescription}

114 \item[\ttindexbold{empty_ss}]

115 is the empty simpset. It has no congruence or rewrite rules and its

116 auto-tactic always fails.

118 \item[$ss$ \ttindexbold{addcongs} $thms$]

119 is the simpset~$ss$ plus the congruence rules~$thms$.

121 \item[$ss$ \ttindexbold{delcongs} $thms$]

122 is the simpset~$ss$ minus the congruence rules~$thms$.

124 \item[$ss$ \ttindexbold{addrews} $thms$]

125 is the simpset~$ss$ plus the rewrite rules~$thms$.

127 \item[$ss$ \ttindexbold{delrews} $thms$]

128 is the simpset~$ss$ minus the rewrite rules~$thms$.

130 \item[$ss$ \ttindexbold{setauto} $tacf$]

131 is the simpset~$ss$ with $tacf$ for its auto-tactic.

133 \item[\ttindexbold{print_ss} $ss$]

134 prints all the congruence and rewrite rules in the simpset~$ss$.

135 \end{ttdescription}

136 Adding a rule to a simpset already containing it, or deleting one

137 from a simpset not containing it, generates a warning message.

139 In principle, any theorem can be used as a rewrite rule. Before adding a

140 theorem to a simpset, {\tt addrews} preprocesses the theorem to extract the

141 maximum amount of rewriting from it. Thus it need not have the form $s=t$.

142 In {\tt FOL} for example, an atomic formula $P$ is transformed into the

143 rewrite rule $P \bimp True$. This preprocessing is not fixed but logic

144 dependent. The existing logics like {\tt FOL} are fairly clever in this

145 respect. For a more precise description see {\tt mk_rew_rules} in

146 \S\ref{SimpFun-input}.

148 The auto-tactic is applied after simplification to solve a goal. This may

149 be the overall goal or some subgoal that arose during conditional

150 rewriting. Calling ${\tt auto_tac}~i$ must either solve exactly

151 subgoal~$i$ or fail. If it succeeds without reducing the number of

152 subgoals by one, havoc and strange exceptions may result.

153 A typical auto-tactic is {\tt ares_tac [TrueI]}, which attempts proof by

154 assumption and resolution with the theorem $True$. In explicitly typed

155 logics, the auto-tactic can be used to solve simple type checking

156 obligations. Some applications demand a sophisticated auto-tactic such as

157 {\tt fast_tac}, but this could make simplification slow.

159 \begin{warn}

160 Rewriting never instantiates unknowns in subgoals. (It uses

161 \ttindex{match_tac} rather than \ttindex{resolve_tac}.) However, the

162 auto-tactic is permitted to instantiate unknowns.

163 \end{warn}

166 \section{The simplification tactics} \label{simp-tactics}

167 \index{simplification!tactics|bold}

168 \index{tactics!simplification|bold}

169 The actual simplification work is performed by the following tactics. The

170 rewriting strategy is strictly bottom up. Conditions in conditional rewrite

171 rules are solved recursively before the rewrite rule is applied.

173 There are two basic simplification tactics:

174 \begin{ttdescription}

175 \item[\ttindexbold{SIMP_TAC} $ss$ $i$]

176 simplifies subgoal~$i$ using the rules in~$ss$. It may solve the

177 subgoal completely if it has become trivial, using the auto-tactic

178 (\S\ref{simp-simpsets}).

180 \item[\ttindexbold{ASM_SIMP_TAC}]

181 is like \verb$SIMP_TAC$, but also uses assumptions as additional

182 rewrite rules.

183 \end{ttdescription}

184 Many logics have conditional operators like {\it if-then-else}. If the

185 simplifier has been set up with such case splits (see~\ttindex{case_splits}

186 in \S\ref{SimpFun-input}), there are tactics which automatically alternate

187 between simplification and case splitting:

188 \begin{ttdescription}

189 \item[\ttindexbold{SIMP_CASE_TAC}]

190 is like {\tt SIMP_TAC} but also performs automatic case splits.

191 More precisely, after each simplification phase the tactic tries to apply a

192 theorem in \ttindex{case_splits}. If this succeeds, the tactic calls

193 itself recursively on the result.

195 \item[\ttindexbold{ASM_SIMP_CASE_TAC}]

196 is like {\tt SIMP_CASE_TAC}, but also uses assumptions for

197 rewriting.

199 \item[\ttindexbold{SIMP_CASE2_TAC}]

200 is like {\tt SIMP_CASE_TAC}, but also tries to solve the

201 pre-conditions of conditional simplification rules by repeated case splits.

203 \item[\ttindexbold{CASE_TAC}]

204 tries to break up a goal using a rule in

205 \ttindex{case_splits}.

207 \item[\ttindexbold{SIMP_THM}]

208 simplifies a theorem using assumptions and case splitting.

209 \end{ttdescription}

210 Finally there are two useful functions for generating congruence

211 rules for constants and free variables:

212 \begin{ttdescription}

213 \item[\ttindexbold{mk_congs} $thy$ $cs$]

214 computes a list of congruence rules, one for each constant in $cs$.

215 Remember that the name of an infix constant

216 \verb$+$ is \verb$op +$.

218 \item[\ttindexbold{mk_typed_congs}]

219 computes congruence rules for explicitly typed free variables and

220 constants. Its second argument is a list of name and type pairs. Names

221 can be either free variables like {\tt P}, or constants like \verb$op =$.

222 For example in {\tt FOL}, the pair

223 \verb$("f","'a => 'a")$ generates the rule \verb$?x = ?y ==> f(?x) = f(?y)$.

224 Such congruence rules are necessary for goals with free variables whose

225 arguments need to be rewritten.

226 \end{ttdescription}

227 Both functions work correctly only if {\tt SimpFun} has been supplied with the

228 necessary substitution rules. The details are discussed in

229 \S\ref{SimpFun-input} under {\tt subst_thms}.

230 \begin{warn}

231 Using the simplifier effectively may take a bit of experimentation. In

232 particular it may often happen that simplification stops short of what you

233 expected or runs forever. To diagnose these problems, the simplifier can be

234 traced. The reference variable \ttindexbold{tracing} controls the output of

235 tracing information.

236 \index{tracing!of simplification}

237 \end{warn}

240 \section{Example: using the simplifier}

241 \index{simplification!example}

242 Assume we are working within {\tt FOL} and that

243 \begin{ttdescription}

244 \item[Nat.thy] is a theory including the constants $0$, $Suc$ and $+$,

245 \item[add_0] is the rewrite rule $0+n = n$,

246 \item[add_Suc] is the rewrite rule $Suc(m)+n = Suc(m+n)$,

247 \item[induct] is the induction rule

248 $\List{P(0); \Forall x. P(x)\Imp P(Suc(x))} \Imp P(n)$.

249 \item[FOL_ss] is a basic simpset for {\tt FOL}.

250 \end{ttdescription}

251 We generate congruence rules for $Suc$ and for the infix operator~$+$:

252 \begin{ttbox}

253 val nat_congs = mk_congs Nat.thy ["Suc", "op +"];

254 prths nat_congs;

255 {\out ?Xa = ?Ya ==> Suc(?Xa) = Suc(?Ya)}

256 {\out [| ?Xa = ?Ya; ?Xb = ?Yb |] ==> ?Xa + ?Xb = ?Ya + ?Yb}

257 \end{ttbox}

258 We create a simpset for natural numbers by extending~{\tt FOL_ss}:

259 \begin{ttbox}

260 val add_ss = FOL_ss addcongs nat_congs

261 addrews [add_0, add_Suc];

262 \end{ttbox}

263 Proofs by induction typically involve simplification:\footnote

264 {These examples reside on the file {\tt FOL/ex/nat.ML}.}

265 \begin{ttbox}

266 goal Nat.thy "m+0 = m";

267 {\out Level 0}

268 {\out m + 0 = m}

269 {\out 1. m + 0 = m}

270 \ttbreak

271 by (res_inst_tac [("n","m")] induct 1);

272 {\out Level 1}

273 {\out m + 0 = m}

274 {\out 1. 0 + 0 = 0}

275 {\out 2. !!x. x + 0 = x ==> Suc(x) + 0 = Suc(x)}

276 \end{ttbox}

277 Simplification solves the first subgoal:

278 \begin{ttbox}

279 by (SIMP_TAC add_ss 1);

280 {\out Level 2}

281 {\out m + 0 = m}

282 {\out 1. !!x. x + 0 = x ==> Suc(x) + 0 = Suc(x)}

283 \end{ttbox}

284 The remaining subgoal requires \ttindex{ASM_SIMP_TAC} in order to use the

285 induction hypothesis as a rewrite rule:

286 \begin{ttbox}

287 by (ASM_SIMP_TAC add_ss 1);

288 {\out Level 3}

289 {\out m + 0 = m}

290 {\out No subgoals!}

291 \end{ttbox}

292 The next proof is similar.

293 \begin{ttbox}

294 goal Nat.thy "m+Suc(n) = Suc(m+n)";

295 {\out Level 0}

296 {\out m + Suc(n) = Suc(m + n)}

297 {\out 1. m + Suc(n) = Suc(m + n)}

298 \ttbreak

299 by (res_inst_tac [("n","m")] induct 1);

300 {\out Level 1}

301 {\out m + Suc(n) = Suc(m + n)}

302 {\out 1. 0 + Suc(n) = Suc(0 + n)}

303 {\out 2. !!x. x + Suc(n) = Suc(x + n) ==> Suc(x) + Suc(n) = Suc(Suc(x) + n)}

304 \end{ttbox}

305 Using the tactical \ttindex{ALLGOALS}, a single command simplifies all the

306 subgoals:

307 \begin{ttbox}

308 by (ALLGOALS (ASM_SIMP_TAC add_ss));

309 {\out Level 2}

310 {\out m + Suc(n) = Suc(m + n)}

311 {\out No subgoals!}

312 \end{ttbox}

313 Some goals contain free function variables. The simplifier must have

314 congruence rules for those function variables, or it will be unable to

315 simplify their arguments:

316 \begin{ttbox}

317 val f_congs = mk_typed_congs Nat.thy [("f","nat => nat")];

318 val f_ss = add_ss addcongs f_congs;

319 prths f_congs;

320 {\out ?Xa = ?Ya ==> f(?Xa) = f(?Ya)}

321 \end{ttbox}

322 Here is a conjecture to be proved for an arbitrary function~$f$ satisfying

323 the law $f(Suc(n)) = Suc(f(n))$:

324 \begin{ttbox}

325 val [prem] = goal Nat.thy

326 "(!!n. f(Suc(n)) = Suc(f(n))) ==> f(i+j) = i+f(j)";

327 {\out Level 0}

328 {\out f(i + j) = i + f(j)}

329 {\out 1. f(i + j) = i + f(j)}

330 \ttbreak

331 by (res_inst_tac [("n","i")] induct 1);

332 {\out Level 1}

333 {\out f(i + j) = i + f(j)}

334 {\out 1. f(0 + j) = 0 + f(j)}

335 {\out 2. !!x. f(x + j) = x + f(j) ==> f(Suc(x) + j) = Suc(x) + f(j)}

336 \end{ttbox}

337 We simplify each subgoal in turn. The first one is trivial:

338 \begin{ttbox}

339 by (SIMP_TAC f_ss 1);

340 {\out Level 2}

341 {\out f(i + j) = i + f(j)}

342 {\out 1. !!x. f(x + j) = x + f(j) ==> f(Suc(x) + j) = Suc(x) + f(j)}

343 \end{ttbox}

344 The remaining subgoal requires rewriting by the premise, shown

345 below, so we add it to {\tt f_ss}:

346 \begin{ttbox}

347 prth prem;

348 {\out f(Suc(?n)) = Suc(f(?n)) [!!n. f(Suc(n)) = Suc(f(n))]}

349 by (ASM_SIMP_TAC (f_ss addrews [prem]) 1);

350 {\out Level 3}

351 {\out f(i + j) = i + f(j)}

352 {\out No subgoals!}

353 \end{ttbox}

356 \section{Setting up the simplifier} \label{SimpFun-input}

357 \index{simplification!setting up|bold}

358 To set up a simplifier for a new logic, the \ML\ functor

359 \ttindex{SimpFun} needs to be supplied with theorems to justify

360 rewriting. A rewrite relation must be reflexive and transitive; symmetry

361 is not necessary. Hence the package is also applicable to non-symmetric

362 relations such as occur in operational semantics. In the sequel, $\gg$

363 denotes some {\bf reduction relation}: a binary relation to be used for

364 rewriting. Several reduction relations can be used at once. In {\tt FOL},

365 both $=$ (on terms) and $\bimp$ (on formulae) can be used for rewriting.

367 The argument to {\tt SimpFun} is a structure with signature

368 \ttindexbold{SIMP_DATA}:

369 \begin{ttbox}

370 signature SIMP_DATA =

371 sig

372 val case_splits : (thm * string) list

373 val dest_red : term -> term * term * term

374 val mk_rew_rules : thm -> thm list

375 val norm_thms : (thm*thm) list

376 val red1 : thm

377 val red2 : thm

378 val refl_thms : thm list

379 val subst_thms : thm list

380 val trans_thms : thm list

381 end;

382 \end{ttbox}

383 The components of {\tt SIMP_DATA} need to be instantiated as follows. Many

384 of these components are lists, and can be empty.

385 \begin{ttdescription}

386 \item[\ttindexbold{refl_thms}]

387 supplies reflexivity theorems of the form $\Var{x} \gg

388 \Var{x}$. They must not have additional premises as, for example,

389 $\Var{x}\in\Var{A} \Imp \Var{x} = \Var{x}\in\Var{A}$ in type theory.

391 \item[\ttindexbold{trans_thms}]

392 supplies transitivity theorems of the form

393 $\List{\Var{x}\gg\Var{y}; \Var{y}\gg\Var{z}} \Imp {\Var{x}\gg\Var{z}}$.

395 \item[\ttindexbold{red1}]

396 is a theorem of the form $\List{\Var{P}\gg\Var{Q};

397 \Var{P}} \Imp \Var{Q}$, where $\gg$ is a relation between formulae, such as

398 $\bimp$ in {\tt FOL}.

400 \item[\ttindexbold{red2}]

401 is a theorem of the form $\List{\Var{P}\gg\Var{Q};

402 \Var{Q}} \Imp \Var{P}$, where $\gg$ is a relation between formulae, such as

403 $\bimp$ in {\tt FOL}.

405 \item[\ttindexbold{mk_rew_rules}]

406 is a function that extracts rewrite rules from theorems. A rewrite rule is

407 a theorem of the form $\List{\ldots}\Imp s \gg t$. In its simplest form,

408 {\tt mk_rew_rules} maps a theorem $t$ to the singleton list $[t]$. More

409 sophisticated versions may do things like

410 \[

411 \begin{array}{l@{}r@{\quad\mapsto\quad}l}

412 \mbox{create formula rewrites:}& P & [P \bimp True] \\[.5ex]

413 \mbox{remove negations:}& \lnot P & [P \bimp False] \\[.5ex]

414 \mbox{create conditional rewrites:}& P\imp s\gg t & [P\Imp s\gg t] \\[.5ex]

415 \mbox{break up conjunctions:}&

416 (s@1 \gg@1 t@1) \conj (s@2 \gg@2 t@2) & [s@1 \gg@1 t@1, s@2 \gg@2 t@2]

417 \end{array}

418 \]

419 The more theorems are turned into rewrite rules, the better. The function

420 is used in two places:

421 \begin{itemize}

422 \item

423 $ss$~\ttindex{addrews}~$thms$ applies {\tt mk_rew_rules} to each element of

424 $thms$ before adding it to $ss$.

425 \item

426 simplification with assumptions (as in \ttindex{ASM_SIMP_TAC}) uses

427 {\tt mk_rew_rules} to turn assumptions into rewrite rules.

428 \end{itemize}

430 \item[\ttindexbold{case_splits}]

431 supplies expansion rules for case splits. The simplifier is designed

432 for rules roughly of the kind

433 \[ \Var{P}(if(\Var{Q},\Var{x},\Var{y})) \bimp (\Var{Q} \imp \Var{P}(\Var{x}))

434 \conj (\lnot\Var{Q} \imp \Var{P}(\Var{y}))

435 \]

436 but is insensitive to the form of the right-hand side. Other examples

437 include product types, where $split ::

438 (\alpha\To\beta\To\gamma)\To\alpha*\beta\To\gamma$:

439 \[ \Var{P}(split(\Var{f},\Var{p})) \bimp (\forall a~b. \Var{p} =

440 {<}a,b{>} \imp \Var{P}(\Var{f}(a,b)))

441 \]

442 Each theorem in the list is paired with the name of the constant being

443 eliminated, {\tt"if"} and {\tt"split"} in the examples above.

445 \item[\ttindexbold{norm_thms}]

446 supports an optimization. It should be a list of pairs of rules of the

447 form $\Var{x} \gg norm(\Var{x})$ and $norm(\Var{x}) \gg \Var{x}$. These

448 introduce and eliminate {\tt norm}, an arbitrary function that should be

449 used nowhere else. This function serves to tag subterms that are in normal

450 form. Such rules can speed up rewriting significantly!

452 \item[\ttindexbold{subst_thms}]

453 supplies substitution rules of the form

454 \[ \List{\Var{x} \gg \Var{y}; \Var{P}(\Var{x})} \Imp \Var{P}(\Var{y}) \]

455 They are used to derive congruence rules via \ttindex{mk_congs} and

456 \ttindex{mk_typed_congs}. If $f :: [\tau@1,\cdots,\tau@n]\To\tau$ is a

457 constant or free variable, the computation of a congruence rule

458 \[\List{\Var{x@1} \gg@1 \Var{y@1}; \ldots; \Var{x@n} \gg@n \Var{y@n}}

459 \Imp f(\Var{x@1},\ldots,\Var{x@n}) \gg f(\Var{y@1},\ldots,\Var{y@n}) \]

460 requires a reflexivity theorem for some reduction ${\gg} ::

461 \alpha\To\alpha\To\sigma$ such that $\tau$ is an instance of $\alpha$. If a

462 suitable reflexivity law is missing, no congruence rule for $f$ can be

463 generated. Otherwise an $n$-ary congruence rule of the form shown above is

464 derived, subject to the availability of suitable substitution laws for each

465 argument position.

467 A substitution law is suitable for argument $i$ if it

468 uses a reduction ${\gg@i} :: \alpha@i\To\alpha@i\To\sigma@i$ such that

469 $\tau@i$ is an instance of $\alpha@i$. If a suitable substitution law for

470 argument $i$ is missing, the $i^{th}$ premise of the above congruence rule

471 cannot be generated and hence argument $i$ cannot be rewritten. In the

472 worst case, if there are no suitable substitution laws at all, the derived

473 congruence simply degenerates into a reflexivity law.

475 \item[\ttindexbold{dest_red}]

476 takes reductions apart. Given a term $t$ representing the judgement

477 \mbox{$a \gg b$}, \verb$dest_red$~$t$ should return a triple $(c,ta,tb)$

478 where $ta$ and $tb$ represent $a$ and $b$, and $c$ is a term of the form

479 \verb$Const(_,_)$, the reduction constant $\gg$.

481 Suppose the logic has a coercion function like $Trueprop::o\To prop$, as do

482 {\tt FOL} and~{\tt HOL}\@. If $\gg$ is a binary operator (not necessarily

483 infix), the following definition does the job:

484 \begin{verbatim}

485 fun dest_red( _ $ (c $ ta $ tb) ) = (c,ta,tb);

486 \end{verbatim}

487 The wildcard pattern {\tt_} matches the coercion function.

488 \end{ttdescription}

491 \section{A sample instantiation}

492 Here is the instantiation of {\tt SIMP_DATA} for FOL. The code for {\tt

493 mk_rew_rules} is not shown; see the file {\tt FOL/simpdata.ML}.

494 \begin{ttbox}

495 structure FOL_SimpData : SIMP_DATA =

496 struct

497 val refl_thms = [ \(\Var{x}=\Var{x}\), \(\Var{P}\bimp\Var{P}\) ]

498 val trans_thms = [ \(\List{\Var{x}=\Var{y};\Var{y}=\Var{z}}\Imp\Var{x}=\Var{z}\),

499 \(\List{\Var{P}\bimp\Var{Q};\Var{Q}\bimp\Var{R}}\Imp\Var{P}\bimp\Var{R}\) ]

500 val red1 = \(\List{\Var{P}\bimp\Var{Q}; \Var{P}} \Imp \Var{Q}\)

501 val red2 = \(\List{\Var{P}\bimp\Var{Q}; \Var{Q}} \Imp \Var{P}\)

502 val mk_rew_rules = ...

503 val case_splits = [ \(\Var{P}(if(\Var{Q},\Var{x},\Var{y})) \bimp\)

504 \((\Var{Q} \imp \Var{P}(\Var{x})) \conj (\lnot\Var{Q} \imp \Var{P}(\Var{y}))\) ]

505 val norm_thms = [ (\(\Var{x}=norm(\Var{x})\),\(norm(\Var{x})=\Var{x}\)),

506 (\(\Var{P}\bimp{}NORM(\Var{P}\)), \(NORM(\Var{P})\bimp\Var{P}\)) ]

507 val subst_thms = [ \(\List{\Var{x}=\Var{y}; \Var{P}(\Var{x})}\Imp\Var{P}(\Var{y})\) ]

508 val dest_red = fn (_ $ (opn $ lhs $ rhs)) => (opn,lhs,rhs)

509 end;

510 \end{ttbox}

512 \index{simplification|)}