author | wenzelm |
Fri, 12 Aug 2016 17:53:55 +0200 | |
changeset 63680 | 6e1e8b5abbfa |
parent 61498 | 32a20d7b3ee4 |
child 66453 | cc19f7ca2ed6 |
permissions | -rw-r--r-- |
37613 | 1 |
theory Inductive_Predicate |
2 |
imports Setup |
|
3 |
begin |
|
4 |
||
5 |
(*<*) |
|
38441 | 6 |
hide_const %invisible append |
37613 | 7 |
|
38441 | 8 |
inductive %invisible append where |
37613 | 9 |
"append [] ys ys" |
38811 | 10 |
| "append xs ys zs \<Longrightarrow> append (x # xs) ys (x # zs)" |
38441 | 11 |
|
12 |
lemma %invisible append: "append xs ys zs = (xs @ ys = zs)" |
|
13 |
by (induct xs arbitrary: ys zs) (auto elim: append.cases intro: append.intros) |
|
46515 | 14 |
|
15 |
lemmas lexordp_def = |
|
16 |
lexordp_def [unfolded lexord_def mem_Collect_eq split] |
|
37613 | 17 |
(*>*) |
38441 | 18 |
|
59377 | 19 |
section \<open>Inductive Predicates \label{sec:inductive}\<close> |
38441 | 20 |
|
59377 | 21 |
text \<open> |
38508 | 22 |
The @{text "predicate compiler"} is an extension of the code generator |
38441 | 23 |
which turns inductive specifications into equational ones, from |
24 |
which in turn executable code can be generated. The mechanisms of |
|
25 |
this compiler are described in detail in |
|
58620 | 26 |
@{cite "Berghofer-Bulwahn-Haftmann:2009:TPHOL"}. |
38441 | 27 |
|
28 |
Consider the simple predicate @{const append} given by these two |
|
29 |
introduction rules: |
|
59377 | 30 |
\<close> |
38441 | 31 |
|
59377 | 32 |
text %quote \<open> |
38441 | 33 |
@{thm append.intros(1)[of ys]} \\ |
34 |
@{thm append.intros(2)[of xs ys zs x]} |
|
59377 | 35 |
\<close> |
38441 | 36 |
|
59377 | 37 |
text \<open> |
38441 | 38 |
\noindent To invoke the compiler, simply use @{command_def "code_pred"}: |
59377 | 39 |
\<close> |
37613 | 40 |
|
38441 | 41 |
code_pred %quote append . |
42 |
||
59377 | 43 |
text \<open> |
38441 | 44 |
\noindent The @{command "code_pred"} command takes the name of the |
45 |
inductive predicate and then you put a period to discharge a trivial |
|
46 |
correctness proof. The compiler infers possible modes for the |
|
47 |
predicate and produces the derived code equations. Modes annotate |
|
48 |
which (parts of the) arguments are to be taken as input, and which |
|
49 |
output. Modes are similar to types, but use the notation @{text "i"} |
|
50 |
for input and @{text "o"} for output. |
|
51 |
||
52 |
For @{term "append"}, the compiler can infer the following modes: |
|
53 |
\begin{itemize} |
|
54 |
\item @{text "i \<Rightarrow> i \<Rightarrow> i \<Rightarrow> bool"} |
|
55 |
\item @{text "i \<Rightarrow> i \<Rightarrow> o \<Rightarrow> bool"} |
|
56 |
\item @{text "o \<Rightarrow> o \<Rightarrow> i \<Rightarrow> bool"} |
|
57 |
\end{itemize} |
|
58 |
You can compute sets of predicates using @{command_def "values"}: |
|
59377 | 59 |
\<close> |
38441 | 60 |
|
61 |
values %quote "{zs. append [(1::nat),2,3] [4,5] zs}" |
|
62 |
||
59377 | 63 |
text \<open>\noindent outputs @{text "{[1, 2, 3, 4, 5]}"}, and\<close> |
38441 | 64 |
|
65 |
values %quote "{(xs, ys). append xs ys [(2::nat),3]}" |
|
66 |
||
59377 | 67 |
text \<open>\noindent outputs @{text "{([], [2, 3]), ([2], [3]), ([2, 3], [])}"}.\<close> |
37613 | 68 |
|
59377 | 69 |
text \<open> |
38441 | 70 |
\noindent If you are only interested in the first elements of the |
71 |
set comprehension (with respect to a depth-first search on the |
|
72 |
introduction rules), you can pass an argument to @{command "values"} |
|
73 |
to specify the number of elements you want: |
|
59377 | 74 |
\<close> |
37613 | 75 |
|
38441 | 76 |
values %quote 1 "{(xs, ys). append xs ys [(1::nat), 2, 3, 4]}" |
77 |
values %quote 3 "{(xs, ys). append xs ys [(1::nat), 2, 3, 4]}" |
|
78 |
||
59377 | 79 |
text \<open> |
38441 | 80 |
\noindent The @{command "values"} command can only compute set |
81 |
comprehensions for which a mode has been inferred. |
|
82 |
||
83 |
The code equations for a predicate are made available as theorems with |
|
84 |
the suffix @{text "equation"}, and can be inspected with: |
|
59377 | 85 |
\<close> |
38441 | 86 |
|
87 |
thm %quote append.equation |
|
88 |
||
59377 | 89 |
text \<open> |
38441 | 90 |
\noindent More advanced options are described in the following subsections. |
59377 | 91 |
\<close> |
38441 | 92 |
|
59377 | 93 |
subsection \<open>Alternative names for functions\<close> |
38441 | 94 |
|
59377 | 95 |
text \<open> |
38441 | 96 |
By default, the functions generated from a predicate are named after |
97 |
the predicate with the mode mangled into the name (e.g., @{text |
|
98 |
"append_i_i_o"}). You can specify your own names as follows: |
|
59377 | 99 |
\<close> |
38441 | 100 |
|
38811 | 101 |
code_pred %quote (modes: i \<Rightarrow> i \<Rightarrow> o \<Rightarrow> bool as concat, |
102 |
o \<Rightarrow> o \<Rightarrow> i \<Rightarrow> bool as split, |
|
103 |
i \<Rightarrow> o \<Rightarrow> i \<Rightarrow> bool as suffix) append . |
|
37613 | 104 |
|
59377 | 105 |
subsection \<open>Alternative introduction rules\<close> |
38441 | 106 |
|
59377 | 107 |
text \<open> |
38441 | 108 |
Sometimes the introduction rules of an predicate are not executable |
109 |
because they contain non-executable constants or specific modes |
|
110 |
could not be inferred. It is also possible that the introduction |
|
111 |
rules yield a function that loops forever due to the execution in a |
|
112 |
depth-first search manner. Therefore, you can declare alternative |
|
113 |
introduction rules for predicates with the attribute @{attribute |
|
114 |
"code_pred_intro"}. For example, the transitive closure is defined |
|
115 |
by: |
|
59377 | 116 |
\<close> |
38441 | 117 |
|
59377 | 118 |
text %quote \<open> |
39682
066e2d4d0de8
avoid fragile tranclp syntax; corrected resolution; corrected typo
haftmann
parents:
39065
diff
changeset
|
119 |
@{lemma [source] "r a b \<Longrightarrow> tranclp r a b" by (fact tranclp.intros(1))}\\ |
066e2d4d0de8
avoid fragile tranclp syntax; corrected resolution; corrected typo
haftmann
parents:
39065
diff
changeset
|
120 |
@{lemma [source] "tranclp r a b \<Longrightarrow> r b c \<Longrightarrow> tranclp r a c" by (fact tranclp.intros(2))} |
59377 | 121 |
\<close> |
38441 | 122 |
|
59377 | 123 |
text \<open> |
38441 | 124 |
\noindent These rules do not suit well for executing the transitive |
125 |
closure with the mode @{text "(i \<Rightarrow> o \<Rightarrow> bool) \<Rightarrow> i \<Rightarrow> o \<Rightarrow> bool"}, as |
|
126 |
the second rule will cause an infinite loop in the recursive call. |
|
127 |
This can be avoided using the following alternative rules which are |
|
128 |
declared to the predicate compiler by the attribute @{attribute |
|
129 |
"code_pred_intro"}: |
|
59377 | 130 |
\<close> |
38441 | 131 |
|
37613 | 132 |
lemma %quote [code_pred_intro]: |
39682
066e2d4d0de8
avoid fragile tranclp syntax; corrected resolution; corrected typo
haftmann
parents:
39065
diff
changeset
|
133 |
"r a b \<Longrightarrow> tranclp r a b" |
066e2d4d0de8
avoid fragile tranclp syntax; corrected resolution; corrected typo
haftmann
parents:
39065
diff
changeset
|
134 |
"r a b \<Longrightarrow> tranclp r b c \<Longrightarrow> tranclp r a c" |
37613 | 135 |
by auto |
38441 | 136 |
|
59377 | 137 |
text \<open> |
38441 | 138 |
\noindent After declaring all alternative rules for the transitive |
139 |
closure, you invoke @{command "code_pred"} as usual. As you have |
|
140 |
declared alternative rules for the predicate, you are urged to prove |
|
141 |
that these introduction rules are complete, i.e., that you can |
|
142 |
derive an elimination rule for the alternative rules: |
|
59377 | 143 |
\<close> |
38441 | 144 |
|
37613 | 145 |
code_pred %quote tranclp |
146 |
proof - |
|
147 |
case tranclp |
|
39682
066e2d4d0de8
avoid fragile tranclp syntax; corrected resolution; corrected typo
haftmann
parents:
39065
diff
changeset
|
148 |
from this converse_tranclpE [OF tranclp.prems] show thesis by metis |
37613 | 149 |
qed |
38441 | 150 |
|
59377 | 151 |
text \<open> |
38441 | 152 |
\noindent Alternative rules can also be used for constants that have |
153 |
not been defined inductively. For example, the lexicographic order |
|
154 |
which is defined as: |
|
59377 | 155 |
\<close> |
38441 | 156 |
|
59377 | 157 |
text %quote \<open> |
46515 | 158 |
@{thm [display] lexordp_def [of r]} |
59377 | 159 |
\<close> |
38441 | 160 |
|
59377 | 161 |
text \<open> |
38441 | 162 |
\noindent To make it executable, you can derive the following two |
163 |
rules and prove the elimination rule: |
|
59377 | 164 |
\<close> |
38441 | 165 |
|
37613 | 166 |
lemma %quote [code_pred_intro]: |
46515 | 167 |
"append xs (a # v) ys \<Longrightarrow> lexordp r xs ys" |
168 |
(*<*)unfolding lexordp_def by (auto simp add: append)(*>*) |
|
37613 | 169 |
|
170 |
lemma %quote [code_pred_intro]: |
|
46515 | 171 |
"append u (a # v) xs \<Longrightarrow> append u (b # w) ys \<Longrightarrow> r a b |
172 |
\<Longrightarrow> lexordp r xs ys" |
|
173 |
(*<*)unfolding lexordp_def append apply simp |
|
38441 | 174 |
apply (rule disjI2) by auto(*>*) |
37613 | 175 |
|
46515 | 176 |
code_pred %quote lexordp |
38441 | 177 |
(*<*)proof - |
37613 | 178 |
fix r xs ys |
46515 | 179 |
assume lexord: "lexordp r xs ys" |
180 |
assume 1: "\<And>r' xs' ys' a v. r = r' \<Longrightarrow> xs = xs' \<Longrightarrow> ys = ys' |
|
181 |
\<Longrightarrow> append xs' (a # v) ys' \<Longrightarrow> thesis" |
|
182 |
assume 2: "\<And>r' xs' ys' u a v b w. r = r' \<Longrightarrow> xs = xs' \<Longrightarrow> ys = ys' |
|
183 |
\<Longrightarrow> append u (a # v) xs' \<Longrightarrow> append u (b # w) ys' \<Longrightarrow> r' a b \<Longrightarrow> thesis" |
|
37613 | 184 |
{ |
185 |
assume "\<exists>a v. ys = xs @ a # v" |
|
186 |
from this 1 have thesis |
|
46515 | 187 |
by (fastforce simp add: append) |
37613 | 188 |
} moreover |
189 |
{ |
|
46515 | 190 |
assume "\<exists>u a b v w. r a b \<and> xs = u @ a # v \<and> ys = u @ b # w" |
191 |
from this 2 have thesis by (fastforce simp add: append) |
|
37613 | 192 |
} moreover |
193 |
note lexord |
|
194 |
ultimately show thesis |
|
46515 | 195 |
unfolding lexordp_def |
196 |
by fastforce |
|
38441 | 197 |
qed(*>*) |
198 |
||
199 |
||
59377 | 200 |
subsection \<open>Options for values\<close> |
38441 | 201 |
|
59377 | 202 |
text \<open> |
38441 | 203 |
In the presence of higher-order predicates, multiple modes for some |
204 |
predicate could be inferred that are not disambiguated by the |
|
205 |
pattern of the set comprehension. To disambiguate the modes for the |
|
206 |
arguments of a predicate, you can state the modes explicitly in the |
|
207 |
@{command "values"} command. Consider the simple predicate @{term |
|
208 |
"succ"}: |
|
59377 | 209 |
\<close> |
38441 | 210 |
|
211 |
inductive %quote succ :: "nat \<Rightarrow> nat \<Rightarrow> bool" where |
|
37613 | 212 |
"succ 0 (Suc 0)" |
213 |
| "succ x y \<Longrightarrow> succ (Suc x) (Suc y)" |
|
214 |
||
38441 | 215 |
code_pred %quote succ . |
37613 | 216 |
|
59377 | 217 |
text \<open> |
38441 | 218 |
\noindent For this, the predicate compiler can infer modes @{text "o |
219 |
\<Rightarrow> o \<Rightarrow> bool"}, @{text "i \<Rightarrow> o \<Rightarrow> bool"}, @{text "o \<Rightarrow> i \<Rightarrow> bool"} and |
|
220 |
@{text "i \<Rightarrow> i \<Rightarrow> bool"}. The invocation of @{command "values"} |
|
221 |
@{text "{n. tranclp succ 10 n}"} loops, as multiple modes for the |
|
222 |
predicate @{text "succ"} are possible and here the first mode @{text |
|
223 |
"o \<Rightarrow> o \<Rightarrow> bool"} is chosen. To choose another mode for the argument, |
|
224 |
you can declare the mode for the argument between the @{command |
|
225 |
"values"} and the number of elements. |
|
59377 | 226 |
\<close> |
38441 | 227 |
|
61498 | 228 |
values %quote [mode: i \<Rightarrow> o \<Rightarrow> bool] 1 "{n. tranclp succ 10 n}" (*FIXME does not terminate for n\<ge>1*) |
39065 | 229 |
values %quote [mode: o \<Rightarrow> i \<Rightarrow> bool] 1 "{n. tranclp succ n 10}" |
37613 | 230 |
|
38441 | 231 |
|
59377 | 232 |
subsection \<open>Embedding into functional code within Isabelle/HOL\<close> |
38441 | 233 |
|
59377 | 234 |
text \<open> |
38441 | 235 |
To embed the computation of an inductive predicate into functions |
236 |
that are defined in Isabelle/HOL, you have a number of options: |
|
237 |
||
238 |
\begin{itemize} |
|
239 |
||
61498 | 240 |
\item You want to use the first-order predicate with the mode |
241 |
where all arguments are input. Then you can use the predicate directly, e.g. |
|
38441 | 242 |
|
61498 | 243 |
@{text [display] |
244 |
\<open>valid_suffix ys zs = |
|
245 |
(if append [Suc 0, 2] ys zs then Some ys else None)\<close>} |
|
38441 | 246 |
|
61498 | 247 |
\item If you know that the execution returns only one value (it is |
248 |
deterministic), then you can use the combinator @{term |
|
249 |
"Predicate.the"}, e.g., a functional concatenation of lists is |
|
250 |
defined with |
|
38441 | 251 |
|
61498 | 252 |
@{term [display] "functional_concat xs ys = Predicate.the (append_i_i_o xs ys)"} |
38441 | 253 |
|
61498 | 254 |
Note that if the evaluation does not return a unique value, it |
255 |
raises a run-time error @{term "not_unique"}. |
|
38441 | 256 |
|
257 |
\end{itemize} |
|
59377 | 258 |
\<close> |
38441 | 259 |
|
260 |
||
59377 | 261 |
subsection \<open>Further Examples\<close> |
38441 | 262 |
|
59377 | 263 |
text \<open> |
38441 | 264 |
Further examples for compiling inductive predicates can be found in |
63680 | 265 |
\<^file>\<open>~~/src/HOL/Predicate_Compile_Examples/Examples.thy\<close>. There are |
38441 | 266 |
also some examples in the Archive of Formal Proofs, notably in the |
267 |
@{text "POPLmark-deBruijn"} and the @{text "FeatherweightJava"} |
|
268 |
sessions. |
|
59377 | 269 |
\<close> |
38441 | 270 |
|
37613 | 271 |
end |
46515 | 272 |