10123
|
1 |
%
|
|
2 |
\begin{isabellebody}%
|
|
3 |
\def\isabellecontext{CTL}%
|
10133
|
4 |
%
|
|
5 |
\isamarkupsubsection{Computation tree logic---CTL}
|
10149
|
6 |
%
|
|
7 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
|
8 |
The semantics of PDL only needs transitive reflexive closure.
|
|
9 |
Let us now be a bit more adventurous and introduce a new temporal operator
|
|
10 |
that goes beyond transitive reflexive closure. We extend the datatype
|
|
11 |
\isa{formula} by a new constructor%
|
|
12 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
|
13 |
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ {\isacharbar}\ AF\ formula%
|
|
14 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
|
15 |
\noindent
|
|
16 |
which stands for "always in the future":
|
10159
|
17 |
on all paths, at some point the formula holds. Formalizing the notion of an infinite path is easy
|
|
18 |
in HOL: it is simply a function from \isa{nat} to \isa{state}.%
|
10149
|
19 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
10123
|
20 |
\isacommand{constdefs}\ Paths\ {\isacharcolon}{\isacharcolon}\ {\isachardoublequote}state\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ {\isacharparenleft}nat\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ state{\isacharparenright}set{\isachardoublequote}\isanewline
|
10149
|
21 |
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ {\isachardoublequote}Paths\ s\ {\isasymequiv}\ {\isacharbraceleft}p{\isachardot}\ s\ {\isacharequal}\ p\ \isadigit{0}\ {\isasymand}\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymforall}i{\isachardot}\ {\isacharparenleft}p\ i{\isacharcomma}\ p{\isacharparenleft}i{\isacharplus}\isadigit{1}{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M{\isacharparenright}{\isacharbraceright}{\isachardoublequote}%
|
|
22 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
|
23 |
\noindent
|
10159
|
24 |
This definition allows a very succinct statement of the semantics of \isa{AF}:
|
10149
|
25 |
\footnote{Do not be mislead: neither datatypes nor recursive functions can be
|
|
26 |
extended by new constructors or equations. This is just a trick of the
|
|
27 |
presentation. In reality one has to define a new datatype and a new function.}%
|
|
28 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
|
29 |
{\isachardoublequote}s\ {\isasymTurnstile}\ AF\ f\ \ \ \ {\isacharequal}\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymforall}p\ {\isasymin}\ Paths\ s{\isachardot}\ {\isasymexists}i{\isachardot}\ p\ i\ {\isasymTurnstile}\ f{\isacharparenright}{\isachardoublequote}%
|
|
30 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
|
31 |
\noindent
|
|
32 |
Model checking \isa{AF} involves a function which
|
10159
|
33 |
is just complicated enough to warrant a separate definition:%
|
10149
|
34 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
10123
|
35 |
\isacommand{constdefs}\ af\ {\isacharcolon}{\isacharcolon}\ {\isachardoublequote}state\ set\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ state\ set\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ state\ set{\isachardoublequote}\isanewline
|
10149
|
36 |
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ {\isachardoublequote}af\ A\ T\ {\isasymequiv}\ A\ {\isasymunion}\ {\isacharbraceleft}s{\isachardot}\ {\isasymforall}t{\isachardot}\ {\isacharparenleft}s{\isacharcomma}\ t{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M\ {\isasymlongrightarrow}\ t\ {\isasymin}\ T{\isacharbraceright}{\isachardoublequote}%
|
|
37 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
|
38 |
\noindent
|
10159
|
39 |
Now we define \isa{mc\ {\isacharparenleft}AF\ f{\isacharparenright}} as the least set \isa{T} that contains
|
|
40 |
\isa{mc\ f} and all states all of whose direct successors are in \isa{T}:%
|
|
41 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
|
42 |
{\isachardoublequote}mc{\isacharparenleft}AF\ f{\isacharparenright}\ \ \ \ {\isacharequal}\ lfp{\isacharparenleft}af{\isacharparenleft}mc\ f{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}{\isachardoublequote}%
|
|
43 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
|
44 |
\noindent
|
|
45 |
Because \isa{af} is monotone in its second argument (and also its first, but
|
|
46 |
that is irrelevant) \isa{af\ A} has a least fixpoint:%
|
10149
|
47 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
10123
|
48 |
\isacommand{lemma}\ mono{\isacharunderscore}af{\isacharcolon}\ {\isachardoublequote}mono{\isacharparenleft}af\ A{\isacharparenright}{\isachardoublequote}\isanewline
|
10149
|
49 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}simp\ add{\isacharcolon}\ mono{\isacharunderscore}def\ af{\isacharunderscore}def{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
10159
|
50 |
\isacommand{apply}\ blast\isanewline
|
|
51 |
\isacommand{done}%
|
10149
|
52 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
10159
|
53 |
All we need to prove now is that \isa{mc} and \isa{{\isasymTurnstile}}
|
|
54 |
agree for \isa{AF}, i.e.\ that \isa{mc\ {\isacharparenleft}AF\ f{\isacharparenright}\ {\isacharequal}\ {\isacharbraceleft}s{\isachardot}\ s\ {\isasymTurnstile}\ AF\ f{\isacharbraceright}}. This time we prove the two containments separately, starting
|
|
55 |
with the easy one:%
|
|
56 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
|
57 |
\isacommand{theorem}\ AF{\isacharunderscore}lemma\isadigit{1}{\isacharcolon}\isanewline
|
|
58 |
\ \ {\isachardoublequote}lfp{\isacharparenleft}af\ A{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymsubseteq}\ {\isacharbraceleft}s{\isachardot}\ {\isasymforall}\ p\ {\isasymin}\ Paths\ s{\isachardot}\ {\isasymexists}\ i{\isachardot}\ p\ i\ {\isasymin}\ A{\isacharbraceright}{\isachardoublequote}%
|
|
59 |
\begin{isamarkuptxt}%
|
10149
|
60 |
\noindent
|
10159
|
61 |
The proof is again pointwise. Fixpoint induction on the premise \isa{s\ {\isasymin}\ lfp\ {\isacharparenleft}af\ A{\isacharparenright}} followed
|
|
62 |
by simplification and clarification%
|
|
63 |
\end{isamarkuptxt}%
|
10123
|
64 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}rule\ subsetI{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
|
65 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}erule\ Lfp{\isachardot}induct{\isacharbrackleft}OF\ {\isacharunderscore}\ mono{\isacharunderscore}af{\isacharbrackright}{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
10159
|
66 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}clarsimp\ simp\ add{\isacharcolon}\ af{\isacharunderscore}def\ Paths{\isacharunderscore}def{\isacharparenright}%
|
|
67 |
\begin{isamarkuptxt}%
|
|
68 |
\noindent
|
|
69 |
leads to the following somewhat involved proof state
|
|
70 |
\begin{isabelle}
|
|
71 |
\ \isadigit{1}{\isachardot}\ {\isasymAnd}p{\isachardot}\ {\isasymlbrakk}p\ \isadigit{0}\ {\isasymin}\ A\ {\isasymor}\isanewline
|
|
72 |
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymforall}t{\isachardot}\ {\isacharparenleft}p\ \isadigit{0}{\isacharcomma}\ t{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M\ {\isasymlongrightarrow}\isanewline
|
|
73 |
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ t\ {\isasymin}\ lfp\ {\isacharparenleft}af\ A{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymand}\isanewline
|
|
74 |
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymforall}p{\isachardot}\ t\ {\isacharequal}\ p\ \isadigit{0}\ {\isasymand}\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymforall}i{\isachardot}\ {\isacharparenleft}p\ i{\isacharcomma}\ p\ {\isacharparenleft}Suc\ i{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymlongrightarrow}\isanewline
|
|
75 |
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymexists}i{\isachardot}\ p\ i\ {\isasymin}\ A{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}{\isacharsemicolon}\isanewline
|
|
76 |
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ {\isasymforall}i{\isachardot}\ {\isacharparenleft}p\ i{\isacharcomma}\ p\ {\isacharparenleft}Suc\ i{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M{\isasymrbrakk}\isanewline
|
|
77 |
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ {\isasymexists}i{\isachardot}\ p\ i\ {\isasymin}\ A
|
|
78 |
\end{isabelle}
|
|
79 |
Now we eliminate the disjunction. The case \isa{p\ \isadigit{0}\ {\isasymin}\ A} is trivial:%
|
|
80 |
\end{isamarkuptxt}%
|
10123
|
81 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}erule\ disjE{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
10159
|
82 |
\ \isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}blast{\isacharparenright}%
|
|
83 |
\begin{isamarkuptxt}%
|
|
84 |
\noindent
|
|
85 |
In the other case we set \isa{t} to \isa{p\ \isadigit{1}} and simplify matters:%
|
|
86 |
\end{isamarkuptxt}%
|
10123
|
87 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}erule{\isacharunderscore}tac\ x\ {\isacharequal}\ {\isachardoublequote}p\ \isadigit{1}{\isachardoublequote}\ \isakeyword{in}\ allE{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
10159
|
88 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}clarsimp{\isacharparenright}%
|
|
89 |
\begin{isamarkuptxt}%
|
|
90 |
\begin{isabelle}
|
|
91 |
\ \isadigit{1}{\isachardot}\ {\isasymAnd}p{\isachardot}\ {\isasymlbrakk}{\isasymforall}i{\isachardot}\ {\isacharparenleft}p\ i{\isacharcomma}\ p\ {\isacharparenleft}Suc\ i{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M{\isacharsemicolon}\ p\ \isadigit{1}\ {\isasymin}\ lfp\ {\isacharparenleft}af\ A{\isacharparenright}{\isacharsemicolon}\isanewline
|
|
92 |
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ {\isasymforall}pa{\isachardot}\ p\ \isadigit{1}\ {\isacharequal}\ pa\ \isadigit{0}\ {\isasymand}\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymforall}i{\isachardot}\ {\isacharparenleft}pa\ i{\isacharcomma}\ pa\ {\isacharparenleft}Suc\ i{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymlongrightarrow}\isanewline
|
|
93 |
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymexists}i{\isachardot}\ pa\ i\ {\isasymin}\ A{\isacharparenright}{\isasymrbrakk}\isanewline
|
|
94 |
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ {\isasymexists}i{\isachardot}\ p\ i\ {\isasymin}\ A
|
|
95 |
\end{isabelle}
|
|
96 |
It merely remains to set \isa{pa} to \isa{{\isasymlambda}i{\isachardot}\ p\ {\isacharparenleft}i\ {\isacharplus}\ \isadigit{1}{\isacharparenright}}, i.e.\ \isa{p} without its
|
|
97 |
first element. The rest is practically automatic:%
|
|
98 |
\end{isamarkuptxt}%
|
10123
|
99 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}erule{\isacharunderscore}tac\ x\ {\isacharequal}\ {\isachardoublequote}{\isasymlambda}i{\isachardot}\ p{\isacharparenleft}i{\isacharplus}\isadigit{1}{\isacharparenright}{\isachardoublequote}\ \isakeyword{in}\ allE{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
10159
|
100 |
\isacommand{apply}\ simp\isanewline
|
|
101 |
\isacommand{apply}\ blast\isanewline
|
|
102 |
\isacommand{done}%
|
10123
|
103 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
10159
|
104 |
The opposite containment is proved by contradiction: if some state
|
|
105 |
\isa{s} is not in \isa{lfp\ {\isacharparenleft}af\ A{\isacharparenright}}, then we can construct an
|
10123
|
106 |
infinite \isa{A}-avoiding path starting from \isa{s}. The reason is
|
|
107 |
that by unfolding \isa{lfp} we find that if \isa{s} is not in
|
|
108 |
\isa{lfp\ {\isacharparenleft}af\ A{\isacharparenright}}, then \isa{s} is not in \isa{A} and there is a
|
|
109 |
direct successor of \isa{s} that is again not in \isa{lfp\ {\isacharparenleft}af\ A{\isacharparenright}}. Iterating this argument yields the promised infinite
|
|
110 |
\isa{A}-avoiding path. Let us formalize this sketch.
|
|
111 |
|
|
112 |
The one-step argument in the above sketch%
|
|
113 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
|
114 |
\isacommand{lemma}\ not{\isacharunderscore}in{\isacharunderscore}lfp{\isacharunderscore}afD{\isacharcolon}\isanewline
|
|
115 |
\ {\isachardoublequote}s\ {\isasymnotin}\ lfp{\isacharparenleft}af\ A{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ s\ {\isasymnotin}\ A\ {\isasymand}\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymexists}\ t{\isachardot}\ {\isacharparenleft}s{\isacharcomma}t{\isacharparenright}{\isasymin}M\ {\isasymand}\ t\ {\isasymnotin}\ lfp{\isacharparenleft}af\ A{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}{\isachardoublequote}\isanewline
|
|
116 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}erule\ swap{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
|
117 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}rule\ ssubst{\isacharbrackleft}OF\ lfp{\isacharunderscore}Tarski{\isacharbrackleft}OF\ mono{\isacharunderscore}af{\isacharbrackright}{\isacharbrackright}{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
10159
|
118 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}simp\ add{\isacharcolon}af{\isacharunderscore}def{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
|
119 |
\isacommand{done}%
|
10123
|
120 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
|
121 |
\noindent
|
|
122 |
is proved by a variant of contraposition (\isa{swap}:
|
|
123 |
\isa{{\isasymlbrakk}{\isasymnot}\ Pa{\isacharsemicolon}\ {\isasymnot}\ P\ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ Pa{\isasymrbrakk}\ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ P}), i.e.\ assuming the negation of the conclusion
|
|
124 |
and proving \isa{s\ {\isasymin}\ lfp\ {\isacharparenleft}af\ A{\isacharparenright}}. Unfolding \isa{lfp} once and
|
|
125 |
simplifying with the definition of \isa{af} finishes the proof.
|
|
126 |
|
|
127 |
Now we iterate this process. The following construction of the desired
|
|
128 |
path is parameterized by a predicate \isa{P} that should hold along the path:%
|
|
129 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
|
130 |
\isacommand{consts}\ path\ {\isacharcolon}{\isacharcolon}\ {\isachardoublequote}state\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ {\isacharparenleft}state\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ bool{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ {\isacharparenleft}nat\ {\isasymRightarrow}\ state{\isacharparenright}{\isachardoublequote}\isanewline
|
|
131 |
\isacommand{primrec}\isanewline
|
|
132 |
{\isachardoublequote}path\ s\ P\ \isadigit{0}\ {\isacharequal}\ s{\isachardoublequote}\isanewline
|
|
133 |
{\isachardoublequote}path\ s\ P\ {\isacharparenleft}Suc\ n{\isacharparenright}\ {\isacharequal}\ {\isacharparenleft}SOME\ t{\isachardot}\ {\isacharparenleft}path\ s\ P\ n{\isacharcomma}t{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M\ {\isasymand}\ P\ t{\isacharparenright}{\isachardoublequote}%
|
|
134 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
|
135 |
\noindent
|
|
136 |
Element \isa{n\ {\isacharplus}\ \isadigit{1}} on this path is some arbitrary successor
|
10159
|
137 |
\isa{t} of element \isa{n} such that \isa{P\ t} holds. Remember that \isa{SOME\ t{\isachardot}\ R\ t}
|
|
138 |
is some arbitrary but fixed \isa{t} such that \isa{R\ t} holds (see \S\ref{sec-SOME}). Of
|
10123
|
139 |
course, such a \isa{t} may in general not exist, but that is of no
|
|
140 |
concern to us since we will only use \isa{path} in such cases where a
|
|
141 |
suitable \isa{t} does exist.
|
|
142 |
|
10159
|
143 |
Let us show that if each state \isa{s} that satisfies \isa{P}
|
|
144 |
has a successor that again satisfies \isa{P}, then there exists an infinite \isa{P}-path:%
|
10123
|
145 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
10159
|
146 |
\isacommand{lemma}\ infinity{\isacharunderscore}lemma{\isacharcolon}\isanewline
|
|
147 |
\ \ {\isachardoublequote}{\isasymlbrakk}\ P\ s{\isacharsemicolon}\ {\isasymforall}s{\isachardot}\ P\ s\ {\isasymlongrightarrow}\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymexists}\ t{\isachardot}\ {\isacharparenleft}s{\isacharcomma}t{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M\ {\isasymand}\ P\ t{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymrbrakk}\ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\isanewline
|
|
148 |
\ \ \ {\isasymexists}p{\isasymin}Paths\ s{\isachardot}\ {\isasymforall}i{\isachardot}\ P{\isacharparenleft}p\ i{\isacharparenright}{\isachardoublequote}%
|
10123
|
149 |
\begin{isamarkuptxt}%
|
|
150 |
\noindent
|
|
151 |
First we rephrase the conclusion slightly because we need to prove both the path property
|
|
152 |
and the fact that \isa{P} holds simultaneously:%
|
|
153 |
\end{isamarkuptxt}%
|
10159
|
154 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}subgoal{\isacharunderscore}tac\ {\isachardoublequote}{\isasymexists}p{\isachardot}\ s\ {\isacharequal}\ p\ \isadigit{0}\ {\isasymand}\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymforall}i{\isachardot}\ {\isacharparenleft}p\ i{\isacharcomma}p{\isacharparenleft}i{\isacharplus}\isadigit{1}{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M\ {\isasymand}\ P{\isacharparenleft}p\ i{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}{\isachardoublequote}{\isacharparenright}%
|
|
155 |
\begin{isamarkuptxt}%
|
|
156 |
\noindent
|
|
157 |
From this proposition the original goal follows easily:%
|
|
158 |
\end{isamarkuptxt}%
|
|
159 |
\ \isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}simp\ add{\isacharcolon}Paths{\isacharunderscore}def{\isacharcomma}\ blast{\isacharparenright}%
|
|
160 |
\begin{isamarkuptxt}%
|
|
161 |
\noindent
|
|
162 |
The new subgoal is proved by providing the witness \isa{path\ s\ P} for \isa{p}:%
|
|
163 |
\end{isamarkuptxt}%
|
|
164 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}rule{\isacharunderscore}tac\ x\ {\isacharequal}\ {\isachardoublequote}path\ s\ P{\isachardoublequote}\ \isakeyword{in}\ exI{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
|
165 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}clarsimp{\isacharparenright}%
|
|
166 |
\begin{isamarkuptxt}%
|
|
167 |
\noindent
|
|
168 |
After simplification and clarification the subgoal has the following compact form
|
|
169 |
\begin{isabelle}
|
|
170 |
\ \isadigit{1}{\isachardot}\ {\isasymAnd}i{\isachardot}\ {\isasymlbrakk}P\ s{\isacharsemicolon}\ {\isasymforall}s{\isachardot}\ P\ s\ {\isasymlongrightarrow}\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymexists}t{\isachardot}\ {\isacharparenleft}s{\isacharcomma}\ t{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M\ {\isasymand}\ P\ t{\isacharparenright}{\isasymrbrakk}\isanewline
|
|
171 |
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ {\isacharparenleft}path\ s\ P\ i{\isacharcomma}\ SOME\ t{\isachardot}\ {\isacharparenleft}path\ s\ P\ i{\isacharcomma}\ t{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M\ {\isasymand}\ P\ t{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M\ {\isasymand}\isanewline
|
|
172 |
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ P\ {\isacharparenleft}path\ s\ P\ i{\isacharparenright}
|
|
173 |
\end{isabelle}
|
|
174 |
and invites a proof by induction on \isa{i}:%
|
|
175 |
\end{isamarkuptxt}%
|
|
176 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}induct{\isacharunderscore}tac\ i{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
|
177 |
\ \isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}simp{\isacharparenright}%
|
10123
|
178 |
\begin{isamarkuptxt}%
|
|
179 |
\noindent
|
10159
|
180 |
After simplification the base case boils down to
|
|
181 |
\begin{isabelle}
|
|
182 |
\ \isadigit{1}{\isachardot}\ {\isasymlbrakk}P\ s{\isacharsemicolon}\ {\isasymforall}s{\isachardot}\ P\ s\ {\isasymlongrightarrow}\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymexists}t{\isachardot}\ {\isacharparenleft}s{\isacharcomma}\ t{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M\ {\isasymand}\ P\ t{\isacharparenright}{\isasymrbrakk}\isanewline
|
|
183 |
\ \ \ \ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ {\isacharparenleft}s{\isacharcomma}\ SOME\ t{\isachardot}\ {\isacharparenleft}s{\isacharcomma}\ t{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M\ {\isasymand}\ P\ t{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M
|
|
184 |
\end{isabelle}
|
|
185 |
The conclusion looks exceedingly trivial: after all, \isa{t} is chosen such that \isa{{\isacharparenleft}s{\isacharcomma}\ t{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M}
|
|
186 |
holds. However, we first have to show that such a \isa{t} actually exists! This reasoning
|
|
187 |
is embodied in the theorem \isa{someI\isadigit{2}{\isacharunderscore}ex}:
|
|
188 |
\begin{isabelle}%
|
10171
|
189 |
\ \ \ \ \ {\isasymlbrakk}{\isasymexists}a{\isachardot}\ {\isacharquery}P\ a{\isacharsemicolon}\ {\isasymAnd}x{\isachardot}\ {\isacharquery}P\ x\ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ {\isacharquery}Q\ x{\isasymrbrakk}\ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ {\isacharquery}Q\ {\isacharparenleft}SOME\ x{\isachardot}\ {\isacharquery}P\ x{\isacharparenright}%
|
10159
|
190 |
\end{isabelle}
|
|
191 |
When we apply this theorem as an introduction rule, \isa{{\isacharquery}P\ x} becomes
|
|
192 |
\isa{{\isacharparenleft}s{\isacharcomma}\ x{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M\ {\isasymand}\ P\ x} and \isa{{\isacharquery}Q\ x} becomes \isa{{\isacharparenleft}s{\isacharcomma}\ x{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M} and we have to prove
|
|
193 |
two subgoals: \isa{{\isasymexists}a{\isachardot}\ {\isacharparenleft}s{\isacharcomma}\ a{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M\ {\isasymand}\ P\ a}, which follows from the assumptions, and
|
|
194 |
\isa{{\isacharparenleft}s{\isacharcomma}\ x{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M\ {\isasymand}\ P\ x\ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ {\isacharparenleft}s{\isacharcomma}\ x{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M}, which is trivial. Thus it is not surprising that
|
|
195 |
\isa{fast} can prove the base case quickly:%
|
10123
|
196 |
\end{isamarkuptxt}%
|
10159
|
197 |
\ \isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}fast\ intro{\isacharcolon}someI\isadigit{2}{\isacharunderscore}ex{\isacharparenright}%
|
|
198 |
\begin{isamarkuptxt}%
|
|
199 |
\noindent
|
|
200 |
What is worth noting here is that we have used \isa{fast} rather than \isa{blast}.
|
|
201 |
The reason is that \isa{blast} would fail because it cannot cope with \isa{someI\isadigit{2}{\isacharunderscore}ex}:
|
|
202 |
unifying its conclusion with the current subgoal is nontrivial because of the nested schematic
|
|
203 |
variables. For efficiency reasons \isa{blast} does not even attempt such unifications.
|
|
204 |
Although \isa{fast} can in principle cope with complicated unification problems, in practice
|
|
205 |
the number of unifiers arising is often prohibitive and the offending rule may need to be applied
|
|
206 |
explicitly rather than automatically.
|
|
207 |
|
|
208 |
The induction step is similar, but more involved, because now we face nested occurrences of
|
|
209 |
\isa{SOME}. We merely show the proof commands but do not describe th details:%
|
|
210 |
\end{isamarkuptxt}%
|
10123
|
211 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}simp{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
10133
|
212 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}rule\ someI\isadigit{2}{\isacharunderscore}ex{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
10123
|
213 |
\ \isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}blast{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
10133
|
214 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}rule\ someI\isadigit{2}{\isacharunderscore}ex{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
10123
|
215 |
\ \isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}blast{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
10159
|
216 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}blast{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
|
217 |
\isacommand{done}%
|
|
218 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
|
219 |
Function \isa{path} has fulfilled its purpose now and can be forgotten
|
|
220 |
about. It was merely defined to provide the witness in the proof of the
|
10171
|
221 |
\isa{infinity{\isacharunderscore}lemma}. Aficionados of minimal proofs might like to know
|
10159
|
222 |
that we could have given the witness without having to define a new function:
|
|
223 |
the term
|
|
224 |
\begin{isabelle}%
|
|
225 |
\ \ \ \ \ nat{\isacharunderscore}rec\ s\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymlambda}n\ t{\isachardot}\ SOME\ u{\isachardot}\ {\isacharparenleft}t{\isacharcomma}\ u{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M\ {\isasymand}\ P\ u{\isacharparenright}%
|
|
226 |
\end{isabelle}
|
10171
|
227 |
is extensionally equal to \isa{path\ s\ P},
|
10159
|
228 |
where \isa{nat{\isacharunderscore}rec} is the predefined primitive recursor on \isa{nat}, whose defining
|
10171
|
229 |
equations we omit.%
|
10159
|
230 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
|
231 |
%
|
|
232 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
|
233 |
At last we can prove the opposite direction of \isa{AF{\isacharunderscore}lemma\isadigit{1}}:%
|
|
234 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
|
235 |
\isacommand{theorem}\ AF{\isacharunderscore}lemma\isadigit{2}{\isacharcolon}\isanewline
|
|
236 |
{\isachardoublequote}{\isacharbraceleft}s{\isachardot}\ {\isasymforall}\ p\ {\isasymin}\ Paths\ s{\isachardot}\ {\isasymexists}\ i{\isachardot}\ p\ i\ {\isasymin}\ A{\isacharbraceright}\ {\isasymsubseteq}\ lfp{\isacharparenleft}af\ A{\isacharparenright}{\isachardoublequote}%
|
|
237 |
\begin{isamarkuptxt}%
|
|
238 |
\noindent
|
|
239 |
The proof is again pointwise and then by contraposition (\isa{contrapos\isadigit{2}} is the rule
|
|
240 |
\isa{{\isasymlbrakk}{\isacharquery}Q{\isacharsemicolon}\ {\isasymnot}\ {\isacharquery}P\ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ {\isasymnot}\ {\isacharquery}Q{\isasymrbrakk}\ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ {\isacharquery}P}):%
|
|
241 |
\end{isamarkuptxt}%
|
10123
|
242 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}rule\ subsetI{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
|
243 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}erule\ contrapos\isadigit{2}{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
10159
|
244 |
\isacommand{apply}\ simp%
|
|
245 |
\begin{isamarkuptxt}%
|
|
246 |
\begin{isabelle}
|
|
247 |
\ \isadigit{1}{\isachardot}\ {\isasymAnd}s{\isachardot}\ s\ {\isasymnotin}\ lfp\ {\isacharparenleft}af\ A{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ {\isasymexists}p{\isasymin}Paths\ s{\isachardot}\ {\isasymforall}i{\isachardot}\ p\ i\ {\isasymnotin}\ A
|
|
248 |
\end{isabelle}
|
|
249 |
Applying the \isa{infinity{\isacharunderscore}lemma} as a destruction rule leaves two subgoals, the second
|
|
250 |
premise of \isa{infinity{\isacharunderscore}lemma} and the original subgoal:%
|
|
251 |
\end{isamarkuptxt}%
|
|
252 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}drule\ infinity{\isacharunderscore}lemma{\isacharparenright}%
|
|
253 |
\begin{isamarkuptxt}%
|
|
254 |
\begin{isabelle}
|
|
255 |
\ \isadigit{1}{\isachardot}\ {\isasymAnd}s{\isachardot}\ {\isasymforall}s{\isachardot}\ s\ {\isasymnotin}\ lfp\ {\isacharparenleft}af\ A{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymlongrightarrow}\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymexists}t{\isachardot}\ {\isacharparenleft}s{\isacharcomma}\ t{\isacharparenright}\ {\isasymin}\ M\ {\isasymand}\ t\ {\isasymnotin}\ lfp\ {\isacharparenleft}af\ A{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
|
256 |
\ \isadigit{2}{\isachardot}\ {\isasymAnd}s{\isachardot}\ {\isasymexists}p{\isasymin}Paths\ s{\isachardot}\ {\isasymforall}i{\isachardot}\ p\ i\ {\isasymnotin}\ lfp\ {\isacharparenleft}af\ A{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
|
257 |
\ \ \ \ \ \ {\isasymLongrightarrow}\ {\isasymexists}p{\isasymin}Paths\ s{\isachardot}\ {\isasymforall}i{\isachardot}\ p\ i\ {\isasymnotin}\ A
|
|
258 |
\end{isabelle}
|
|
259 |
Both are solved automatically:%
|
|
260 |
\end{isamarkuptxt}%
|
|
261 |
\ \isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}auto\ dest{\isacharcolon}not{\isacharunderscore}in{\isacharunderscore}lfp{\isacharunderscore}afD{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
|
262 |
\isacommand{done}%
|
|
263 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
|
264 |
The main theorem is proved as for PDL, except that we also derive the necessary equality
|
|
265 |
\isa{lfp{\isacharparenleft}af\ A{\isacharparenright}\ {\isacharequal}\ {\isachardot}{\isachardot}{\isachardot}} by combining \isa{AF{\isacharunderscore}lemma\isadigit{1}} and \isa{AF{\isacharunderscore}lemma\isadigit{2}}
|
|
266 |
on the spot:%
|
|
267 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
10123
|
268 |
\isacommand{theorem}\ {\isachardoublequote}mc\ f\ {\isacharequal}\ {\isacharbraceleft}s{\isachardot}\ s\ {\isasymTurnstile}\ f{\isacharbraceright}{\isachardoublequote}\isanewline
|
|
269 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}induct{\isacharunderscore}tac\ f{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
10159
|
270 |
\isacommand{apply}{\isacharparenleft}auto\ simp\ add{\isacharcolon}\ EF{\isacharunderscore}lemma\ equalityI{\isacharbrackleft}OF\ AF{\isacharunderscore}lemma\isadigit{1}\ AF{\isacharunderscore}lemma\isadigit{2}{\isacharbrackright}{\isacharparenright}\isanewline
|
|
271 |
\isacommand{done}%
|
|
272 |
\begin{isamarkuptext}%
|
10171
|
273 |
The above language is not quite CTL. The latter also includes an
|
10178
|
274 |
until-operator, which is the subject of the following exercise.
|
10171
|
275 |
It is not definable in terms of the other operators!
|
|
276 |
\begin{exercise}
|
10178
|
277 |
Extend the datatype of formulae by the binary until operator \isa{EU\ f\ g} with semantics
|
|
278 |
``there exist a path where \isa{f} is true until \isa{g} becomes true''
|
10171
|
279 |
\begin{isabelle}%
|
10178
|
280 |
\ \ \ \ \ s\ {\isasymTurnstile}\ EU\ f\ g\ {\isacharequal}\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymexists}p{\isasymin}Paths\ s{\isachardot}\ {\isasymexists}j{\isachardot}\ p\ j\ {\isasymTurnstile}\ g\ {\isasymand}\ {\isacharparenleft}{\isasymexists}i\ {\isacharless}\ j{\isachardot}\ p\ i\ {\isasymTurnstile}\ f{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}%
|
10171
|
281 |
\end{isabelle}
|
|
282 |
and model checking algorithm
|
|
283 |
\begin{isabelle}%
|
10178
|
284 |
\ \ \ \ \ mc{\isacharparenleft}EU\ f\ g{\isacharparenright}\ {\isacharequal}\ lfp{\isacharparenleft}{\isasymlambda}T{\isachardot}\ mc\ g\ {\isasymunion}\ mc\ f\ {\isasyminter}\ {\isacharparenleft}M{\isacharcircum}{\isacharminus}\isadigit{1}\ {\isacharcircum}{\isacharcircum}\ T{\isacharparenright}{\isacharparenright}%
|
10171
|
285 |
\end{isabelle}
|
10178
|
286 |
Prove the equivalence between semantics and model checking, i.e.\
|
|
287 |
\isa{mc\ {\isacharparenleft}EU\ f\ g{\isacharparenright}\ {\isacharequal}\ {\isacharbraceleft}s{\isachardot}\ s\ {\isasymTurnstile}\ EU\ f\ g{\isacharbraceright}}.
|
|
288 |
|
|
289 |
For readability you may want to equip \isa{EU} with the following customary syntax:
|
|
290 |
\isa{E{\isacharbrackleft}f\ U\ g{\isacharbrackright}}.
|
10171
|
291 |
\end{exercise}
|
|
292 |
|
10159
|
293 |
Let us close this section with a few words about the executability of \isa{mc}.
|
|
294 |
It is clear that if all sets are finite, they can be represented as lists and the usual
|
|
295 |
set operations are easily implemented. Only \isa{lfp} requires a little thought.
|
|
296 |
Fortunately the HOL library proves that in the case of finite sets and a monotone \isa{F},
|
|
297 |
\isa{lfp\ F} can be computed by iterated application of \isa{F} to \isa{{\isacharbraceleft}{\isacharbraceright}} until
|
|
298 |
a fixpoint is reached. It is possible to generate executable functional programs
|
|
299 |
from HOL definitions, but that is beyond the scope of the tutorial.%
|
|
300 |
\end{isamarkuptext}%
|
10123
|
301 |
\end{isabellebody}%
|
|
302 |
%%% Local Variables:
|
|
303 |
%%% mode: latex
|
|
304 |
%%% TeX-master: "root"
|
|
305 |
%%% End:
|