src/HOL/Isar_examples/MultisetOrder.thy

final tuning;

(*  Title:      HOL/Isar_examples/MultisetOrder.thy
    ID:         $Id$
    Author:     Markus Wenzel

Wellfoundedness proof for the multiset order.
*)

header {* Wellfoundedness of multiset ordering *}

theory MultisetOrder = Multiset:

text_raw {*
 \footnote{Original tactic script by Tobias Nipkow (see
 \url{http://isabelle.in.tum.de/library/HOL/Induct/Multiset.html}),
 based on a pen-and-paper proof due to Wilfried Buchholz.}\isanewline
*}
(*<*)(* FIXME move? *)
declare multiset_induct [induct type: multiset]
declare wf_induct [induct set: wf]
declare acc_induct [induct set: acc](*>*)

subsection {* A technical lemma *}

lemma less_add: "(N, M0 + {#a#}) : mult1 r ==>
    (EX M. (M, M0) : mult1 r & N = M + {#a#}) |
    (EX K. (ALL b. b :# K --> (b, a) : r) & N = M0 + K)"
  (concl is "?case1 (mult1 r) | ?case2")
proof (unfold mult1_def)
  let ?r = "\<lambda>K a. ALL b. b :# K --> (b, a) : r"
  let ?R = "\<lambda>N M. EX a M0 K. M = M0 + {#a#} & N = M0 + K & ?r K a"
  let ?case1 = "?case1 {(N, M). ?R N M}"

  assume "(N, M0 + {#a#}) : {(N, M). ?R N M}"
  hence "EX a' M0' K.
      M0 + {#a#} = M0' + {#a'#} & N = M0' + K & ?r K a'" by simp
  thus "?case1 | ?case2"
  proof (elim exE conjE)
    fix a' M0' K
    assume N: "N = M0' + K" and r: "?r K a'"
    assume "M0 + {#a#} = M0' + {#a'#}"
    hence "M0 = M0' & a = a' |
        (EX K'. M0 = K' + {#a'#} & M0' = K' + {#a#})"
      by (simp only: add_eq_conv_ex)
    thus ?thesis
    proof (elim disjE conjE exE)
      assume "M0 = M0'" "a = a'"
      with N r have "?r K a & N = M0 + K" by simp
      hence ?case2 .. thus ?thesis ..
    next
      fix K'
      assume "M0' = K' + {#a#}"
      with N have n: "N = K' + K + {#a#}" by (simp add: union_ac)

      assume "M0 = K' + {#a'#}"
      with r have "?R (K' + K) M0" by blast
      with n have ?case1 by simp thus ?thesis ..
    qed
  qed
qed


subsection {* The key property *}

lemma all_accessible: "wf r ==> ALL M. M : acc (mult1 r)"
proof
  let ?R = "mult1 r"
  let ?W = "acc ?R"
  {
    fix M M0 a
    assume M0: "M0 : ?W"
      and wf_hyp: "ALL b. (b, a) : r --> (ALL M:?W. M + {#b#} : ?W)"
      and acc_hyp: "ALL M. (M, M0) : ?R --> M + {#a#} : ?W"
    have "M0 + {#a#} : ?W"
    proof (rule accI [of "M0 + {#a#}"])
      fix N
      assume "(N, M0 + {#a#}) : ?R"
      hence "((EX M. (M, M0) : ?R & N = M + {#a#}) |
          (EX K. (ALL b. b :# K --> (b, a) : r) & N = M0 + K))"
	by (rule less_add)
      thus "N : ?W"
      proof (elim exE disjE conjE)
	fix M assume "(M, M0) : ?R" and N: "N = M + {#a#}"
	from acc_hyp have "(M, M0) : ?R --> M + {#a#} : ?W" ..
	hence "M + {#a#} : ?W" ..
	thus "N : ?W" by (simp only: N)
      next
	fix K
	assume N: "N = M0 + K"
	assume "ALL b. b :# K --> (b, a) : r"
	have "?this --> M0 + K : ?W" (is "?P K")
	proof (induct K)
	  from M0 have "M0 + {#} : ?W" by simp
	  thus "?P {#}" ..

	  fix K x assume hyp: "?P K"
	  show "?P (K + {#x#})"
	  proof
	    assume a: "ALL b. b :# (K + {#x#}) --> (b, a) : r"
	    hence "(x, a) : r" by simp
	    with wf_hyp have b: "ALL M:?W. M + {#x#} : ?W" by blast

	    from a hyp have "M0 + K : ?W" by simp
	    with b have "(M0 + K) + {#x#} : ?W" ..
	    thus "M0 + (K + {#x#}) : ?W" by (simp only: union_assoc)
	  qed
	qed
	hence "M0 + K : ?W" ..
	thus "N : ?W" by (simp only: N)
      qed
    qed
  } note tedious_reasoning = this

  assume wf: "wf r"
  fix M
  show "M : ?W"
  proof (induct M)
    show "{#} : ?W"
    proof (rule accI)
      fix b assume "(b, {#}) : ?R"
      with not_less_empty show "b : ?W" by contradiction
    qed

    fix M a assume "M : ?W"
    from wf have "ALL M:?W. M + {#a#} : ?W"
    proof induct
      fix a
      assume "ALL b. (b, a) : r --> (ALL M:?W. M + {#b#} : ?W)"
      show "ALL M:?W. M + {#a#} : ?W"
      proof
	fix M assume "M : ?W"
	thus "M + {#a#} : ?W"
          by (rule acc_induct) (rule tedious_reasoning)
      qed
    qed
    thus "M + {#a#} : ?W" ..
  qed
qed


subsection {* Main result *}

theorem wf_mult1: "wf r ==> wf (mult1 r)"
  by (rule acc_wfI, rule all_accessible)

theorem wf_mult: "wf r ==> wf (mult r)"
  by (unfold mult_def, rule wf_trancl, rule wf_mult1)

end