| author | paulson <lp15@cam.ac.uk> |
| Tue, 23 Jun 2015 16:55:28 +0100 | |
| changeset 60562 | 24af00b010cf |
| parent 60523 | be2d9f5ddc76 |
| child 60654 | ca1e07005b8b |
| permissions | -rw-r--r-- |
theory HOL_Specific imports Base "~~/src/HOL/Library/Old_Datatype" "~~/src/HOL/Library/Old_Recdef" "~~/src/Tools/Adhoc_Overloading" "~~/src/HOL/Library/Dlist" "~~/src/HOL/Library/FSet" begin chapter \<open>Higher-Order Logic\<close> text \<open>Isabelle/HOL is based on Higher-Order Logic, a polymorphic version of Church's Simple Theory of Types. HOL can be best understood as a simply-typed version of classical set theory. The logic was first implemented in Gordon's HOL system @{cite "mgordon-hol"}. It extends Church's original logic @{cite "church40"} by explicit type variables (naive polymorphism) and a sound axiomatization scheme for new types based on subsets of existing types. Andrews's book @{cite andrews86} is a full description of the original Church-style higher-order logic, with proofs of correctness and completeness wrt.\ certain set-theoretic interpretations. The particular extensions of Gordon-style HOL are explained semantically in two chapters of the 1993 HOL book @{cite pitts93}. Experience with HOL over decades has demonstrated that higher-order logic is widely applicable in many areas of mathematics and computer science. In a sense, Higher-Order Logic is simpler than First-Order Logic, because there are fewer restrictions and special cases. Note that HOL is \emph{weaker} than FOL with axioms for ZF set theory, which is traditionally considered the standard foundation of regular mathematics, but for most applications this does not matter. If you prefer ML to Lisp, you will probably prefer HOL to ZF. \medskip The syntax of HOL follows @{text "\<lambda>"}-calculus and functional programming. Function application is curried. To apply the function @{text f} of type @{text "\<tau>\<^sub>1 \<Rightarrow> \<tau>\<^sub>2 \<Rightarrow> \<tau>\<^sub>3"} to the arguments @{text a} and @{text b} in HOL, you simply write @{text "f a b"} (as in ML or Haskell). There is no ``apply'' operator; the existing application of the Pure @{text "\<lambda>"}-calculus is re-used. Note that in HOL @{text "f (a, b)"} means ``@{text "f"} applied to the pair @{text "(a, b)"} (which is notation for @{text "Pair a b"}). The latter typically introduces extra formal efforts that can be avoided by currying functions by default. Explicit tuples are as infrequent in HOL formalizations as in good ML or Haskell programs. \medskip Isabelle/HOL has a distinct feel, compared to other object-logics like Isabelle/ZF. It identifies object-level types with meta-level types, taking advantage of the default type-inference mechanism of Isabelle/Pure. HOL fully identifies object-level functions with meta-level functions, with native abstraction and application. These identifications allow Isabelle to support HOL particularly nicely, but they also mean that HOL requires some sophistication from the user. In particular, an understanding of Hindley-Milner type-inference with type-classes, which are both used extensively in the standard libraries and applications. Beginners can set @{attribute show_types} or even @{attribute show_sorts} to get more explicit information about the result of type-inference.\<close> chapter \<open>Derived specification elements\<close> section \<open>Inductive and coinductive definitions \label{sec:hol-inductive}\<close> text \<open> \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{command_def (HOL) "inductive"} & : & @{text "local_theory \<rightarrow> local_theory"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "inductive_set"} & : & @{text "local_theory \<rightarrow> local_theory"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "coinductive"} & : & @{text "local_theory \<rightarrow> local_theory"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "coinductive_set"} & : & @{text "local_theory \<rightarrow> local_theory"} \\ @{command_def "print_inductives"}@{text "\<^sup>*"} & : & @{text "context \<rightarrow>"} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) mono} & : & @{text attribute} \\ \end{matharray} An \emph{inductive definition} specifies the least predicate or set @{text R} closed under given rules: applying a rule to elements of @{text R} yields a result within @{text R}. For example, a structural operational semantics is an inductive definition of an evaluation relation. Dually, a \emph{coinductive definition} specifies the greatest predicate or set @{text R} that is consistent with given rules: every element of @{text R} can be seen as arising by applying a rule to elements of @{text R}. An important example is using bisimulation relations to formalise equivalence of processes and infinite data structures. Both inductive and coinductive definitions are based on the Knaster-Tarski fixed-point theorem for complete lattices. The collection of introduction rules given by the user determines a functor on subsets of set-theoretic relations. The required monotonicity of the recursion scheme is proven as a prerequisite to the fixed-point definition and the resulting consequences. This works by pushing inclusion through logical connectives and any other operator that might be wrapped around recursive occurrences of the defined relation: there must be a monotonicity theorem of the form @{text "A \<le> B \<Longrightarrow> \<M> A \<le> \<M> B"}, for each premise @{text "\<M> R t"} in an introduction rule. The default rule declarations of Isabelle/HOL already take care of most common situations. @{rail \<open> (@@{command (HOL) inductive} | @@{command (HOL) inductive_set} | @@{command (HOL) coinductive} | @@{command (HOL) coinductive_set}) @{syntax "fixes"} @{syntax "for_fixes"} \<newline> (@'where' clauses)? (@'monos' @{syntax thmrefs})? ; clauses: (@{syntax thmdecl}? @{syntax prop} + '|') ; @@{command print_inductives} ('!'?) ; @@{attribute (HOL) mono} (() | 'add' | 'del') \<close>} \begin{description} \item @{command (HOL) "inductive"} and @{command (HOL) "coinductive"} define (co)inductive predicates from the introduction rules. The propositions given as @{text "clauses"} in the @{keyword "where"} part are either rules of the usual @{text "\<And>/\<Longrightarrow>"} format (with arbitrary nesting), or equalities using @{text "\<equiv>"}. The latter specifies extra-logical abbreviations in the sense of @{command_ref abbreviation}. Introducing abstract syntax simultaneously with the actual introduction rules is occasionally useful for complex specifications. The optional @{keyword "for"} part contains a list of parameters of the (co)inductive predicates that remain fixed throughout the definition, in contrast to arguments of the relation that may vary in each occurrence within the given @{text "clauses"}. The optional @{keyword "monos"} declaration contains additional \emph{monotonicity theorems}, which are required for each operator applied to a recursive set in the introduction rules. \item @{command (HOL) "inductive_set"} and @{command (HOL) "coinductive_set"} are wrappers for to the previous commands for native HOL predicates. This allows to define (co)inductive sets, where multiple arguments are simulated via tuples. \item @{command "print_inductives"} prints (co)inductive definitions and monotonicity rules; the ``@{text "!"}'' option indicates extra verbosity. \item @{attribute (HOL) mono} declares monotonicity rules in the context. These rule are involved in the automated monotonicity proof of the above inductive and coinductive definitions. \end{description} \<close> subsection \<open>Derived rules\<close> text \<open>A (co)inductive definition of @{text R} provides the following main theorems: \begin{description} \item @{text R.intros} is the list of introduction rules as proven theorems, for the recursive predicates (or sets). The rules are also available individually, using the names given them in the theory file; \item @{text R.cases} is the case analysis (or elimination) rule; \item @{text R.induct} or @{text R.coinduct} is the (co)induction rule; \item @{text R.simps} is the equation unrolling the fixpoint of the predicate one step. \end{description} When several predicates @{text "R\<^sub>1, \<dots>, R\<^sub>n"} are defined simultaneously, the list of introduction rules is called @{text "R\<^sub>1_\<dots>_R\<^sub>n.intros"}, the case analysis rules are called @{text "R\<^sub>1.cases, \<dots>, R\<^sub>n.cases"}, and the list of mutual induction rules is called @{text "R\<^sub>1_\<dots>_R\<^sub>n.inducts"}. \<close> subsection \<open>Monotonicity theorems\<close> text \<open>The context maintains a default set of theorems that are used in monotonicity proofs. New rules can be declared via the @{attribute (HOL) mono} attribute. See the main Isabelle/HOL sources for some examples. The general format of such monotonicity theorems is as follows: \begin{itemize} \item Theorems of the form @{text "A \<le> B \<Longrightarrow> \<M> A \<le> \<M> B"}, for proving monotonicity of inductive definitions whose introduction rules have premises involving terms such as @{text "\<M> R t"}. \item Monotonicity theorems for logical operators, which are of the general form @{text "(\<dots> \<longrightarrow> \<dots>) \<Longrightarrow> \<dots> (\<dots> \<longrightarrow> \<dots>) \<Longrightarrow> \<dots> \<longrightarrow> \<dots>"}. For example, in the case of the operator @{text "\<or>"}, the corresponding theorem is \[ \infer{@{text "P\<^sub>1 \<or> P\<^sub>2 \<longrightarrow> Q\<^sub>1 \<or> Q\<^sub>2"}}{@{text "P\<^sub>1 \<longrightarrow> Q\<^sub>1"} & @{text "P\<^sub>2 \<longrightarrow> Q\<^sub>2"}} \] \item De Morgan style equations for reasoning about the ``polarity'' of expressions, e.g. \[ @{prop "\<not> \<not> P \<longleftrightarrow> P"} \qquad\qquad @{prop "\<not> (P \<and> Q) \<longleftrightarrow> \<not> P \<or> \<not> Q"} \] \item Equations for reducing complex operators to more primitive ones whose monotonicity can easily be proved, e.g. \[ @{prop "(P \<longrightarrow> Q) \<longleftrightarrow> \<not> P \<or> Q"} \qquad\qquad @{prop "Ball A P \<equiv> \<forall>x. x \<in> A \<longrightarrow> P x"} \] \end{itemize} \<close> subsubsection \<open>Examples\<close> text \<open>The finite powerset operator can be defined inductively like this:\<close> (*<*)experiment begin(*>*) inductive_set Fin :: "'a set \<Rightarrow> 'a set set" for A :: "'a set" where empty: "{} \<in> Fin A" | insert: "a \<in> A \<Longrightarrow> B \<in> Fin A \<Longrightarrow> insert a B \<in> Fin A" text \<open>The accessible part of a relation is defined as follows:\<close> inductive acc :: "('a \<Rightarrow> 'a \<Rightarrow> bool) \<Rightarrow> 'a \<Rightarrow> bool" for r :: "'a \<Rightarrow> 'a \<Rightarrow> bool" (infix "\<prec>" 50) where acc: "(\<And>y. y \<prec> x \<Longrightarrow> acc r y) \<Longrightarrow> acc r x" (*<*)end(*>*) text \<open>Common logical connectives can be easily characterized as non-recursive inductive definitions with parameters, but without arguments.\<close> (*<*)experiment begin(*>*) inductive AND for A B :: bool where "A \<Longrightarrow> B \<Longrightarrow> AND A B" inductive OR for A B :: bool where "A \<Longrightarrow> OR A B" | "B \<Longrightarrow> OR A B" inductive EXISTS for B :: "'a \<Rightarrow> bool" where "B a \<Longrightarrow> EXISTS B" (*<*)end(*>*) text \<open>Here the @{text "cases"} or @{text "induct"} rules produced by the @{command inductive} package coincide with the expected elimination rules for Natural Deduction. Already in the original article by Gerhard Gentzen @{cite "Gentzen:1935"} there is a hint that each connective can be characterized by its introductions, and the elimination can be constructed systematically.\<close> section \<open>Recursive functions \label{sec:recursion}\<close> text \<open> \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{command_def (HOL) "primrec"} & : & @{text "local_theory \<rightarrow> local_theory"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "fun"} & : & @{text "local_theory \<rightarrow> local_theory"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "function"} & : & @{text "local_theory \<rightarrow> proof(prove)"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "termination"} & : & @{text "local_theory \<rightarrow> proof(prove)"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "fun_cases"} & : & @{text "local_theory \<rightarrow> local_theory"} \\ \end{matharray} @{rail \<open> @@{command (HOL) primrec} @{syntax "fixes"} @'where' equations ; (@@{command (HOL) fun} | @@{command (HOL) function}) functionopts? @{syntax "fixes"} \<newline> @'where' equations ; equations: (@{syntax thmdecl}? @{syntax prop} + '|') ; functionopts: '(' (('sequential' | 'domintros') + ',') ')' ; @@{command (HOL) termination} @{syntax term}? ; @@{command (HOL) fun_cases} (@{syntax thmdecl}? @{syntax prop} + @'and') \<close>} \begin{description} \item @{command (HOL) "primrec"} defines primitive recursive functions over datatypes (see also @{command_ref (HOL) datatype}). The given @{text equations} specify reduction rules that are produced by instantiating the generic combinator for primitive recursion that is available for each datatype. Each equation needs to be of the form: @{text [display] "f x\<^sub>1 \<dots> x\<^sub>m (C y\<^sub>1 \<dots> y\<^sub>k) z\<^sub>1 \<dots> z\<^sub>n = rhs"} such that @{text C} is a datatype constructor, @{text rhs} contains only the free variables on the left-hand side (or from the context), and all recursive occurrences of @{text "f"} in @{text "rhs"} are of the form @{text "f \<dots> y\<^sub>i \<dots>"} for some @{text i}. At most one reduction rule for each constructor can be given. The order does not matter. For missing constructors, the function is defined to return a default value, but this equation is made difficult to access for users. The reduction rules are declared as @{attribute simp} by default, which enables standard proof methods like @{method simp} and @{method auto} to normalize expressions of @{text "f"} applied to datatype constructions, by simulating symbolic computation via rewriting. \item @{command (HOL) "function"} defines functions by general wellfounded recursion. A detailed description with examples can be found in @{cite "isabelle-function"}. The function is specified by a set of (possibly conditional) recursive equations with arbitrary pattern matching. The command generates proof obligations for the completeness and the compatibility of patterns. The defined function is considered partial, and the resulting simplification rules (named @{text "f.psimps"}) and induction rule (named @{text "f.pinduct"}) are guarded by a generated domain predicate @{text "f_dom"}. The @{command (HOL) "termination"} command can then be used to establish that the function is total. \item @{command (HOL) "fun"} is a shorthand notation for ``@{command (HOL) "function"}~@{text "(sequential)"}'', followed by automated proof attempts regarding pattern matching and termination. See @{cite "isabelle-function"} for further details. \item @{command (HOL) "termination"}~@{text f} commences a termination proof for the previously defined function @{text f}. If this is omitted, the command refers to the most recent function definition. After the proof is closed, the recursive equations and the induction principle is established. \item @{command (HOL) "fun_cases"} generates specialized elimination rules for function equations. It expects one or more function equations and produces rules that eliminate the given equalities, following the cases given in the function definition. \end{description} Recursive definitions introduced by the @{command (HOL) "function"} command accommodate reasoning by induction (cf.\ @{method induct}): rule @{text "f.induct"} refers to a specific induction rule, with parameters named according to the user-specified equations. Cases are numbered starting from 1. For @{command (HOL) "primrec"}, the induction principle coincides with structural recursion on the datatype where the recursion is carried out. The equations provided by these packages may be referred later as theorem list @{text "f.simps"}, where @{text f} is the (collective) name of the functions defined. Individual equations may be named explicitly as well. The @{command (HOL) "function"} command accepts the following options. \begin{description} \item @{text sequential} enables a preprocessor which disambiguates overlapping patterns by making them mutually disjoint. Earlier equations take precedence over later ones. This allows to give the specification in a format very similar to functional programming. Note that the resulting simplification and induction rules correspond to the transformed specification, not the one given originally. This usually means that each equation given by the user may result in several theorems. Also note that this automatic transformation only works for ML-style datatype patterns. \item @{text domintros} enables the automated generation of introduction rules for the domain predicate. While mostly not needed, they can be helpful in some proofs about partial functions. \end{description} \<close> subsubsection \<open>Example: evaluation of expressions\<close> text \<open>Subsequently, we define mutual datatypes for arithmetic and boolean expressions, and use @{command primrec} for evaluation functions that follow the same recursive structure.\<close> (*<*)experiment begin(*>*) datatype 'a aexp = IF "'a bexp" "'a aexp" "'a aexp" | Sum "'a aexp" "'a aexp" | Diff "'a aexp" "'a aexp" | Var 'a | Num nat and 'a bexp = Less "'a aexp" "'a aexp" | And "'a bexp" "'a bexp" | Neg "'a bexp" text \<open>\medskip Evaluation of arithmetic and boolean expressions\<close> primrec evala :: "('a \<Rightarrow> nat) \<Rightarrow> 'a aexp \<Rightarrow> nat" and evalb :: "('a \<Rightarrow> nat) \<Rightarrow> 'a bexp \<Rightarrow> bool" where "evala env (IF b a1 a2) = (if evalb env b then evala env a1 else evala env a2)" | "evala env (Sum a1 a2) = evala env a1 + evala env a2" | "evala env (Diff a1 a2) = evala env a1 - evala env a2" | "evala env (Var v) = env v" | "evala env (Num n) = n" | "evalb env (Less a1 a2) = (evala env a1 < evala env a2)" | "evalb env (And b1 b2) = (evalb env b1 \<and> evalb env b2)" | "evalb env (Neg b) = (\<not> evalb env b)" text \<open>Since the value of an expression depends on the value of its variables, the functions @{const evala} and @{const evalb} take an additional parameter, an \emph{environment} that maps variables to their values. \medskip Substitution on expressions can be defined similarly. The mapping @{text f} of type @{typ "'a \<Rightarrow> 'a aexp"} given as a parameter is lifted canonically on the types @{typ "'a aexp"} and @{typ "'a bexp"}, respectively. \<close> primrec substa :: "('a \<Rightarrow> 'b aexp) \<Rightarrow> 'a aexp \<Rightarrow> 'b aexp" and substb :: "('a \<Rightarrow> 'b aexp) \<Rightarrow> 'a bexp \<Rightarrow> 'b bexp" where "substa f (IF b a1 a2) = IF (substb f b) (substa f a1) (substa f a2)" | "substa f (Sum a1 a2) = Sum (substa f a1) (substa f a2)" | "substa f (Diff a1 a2) = Diff (substa f a1) (substa f a2)" | "substa f (Var v) = f v" | "substa f (Num n) = Num n" | "substb f (Less a1 a2) = Less (substa f a1) (substa f a2)" | "substb f (And b1 b2) = And (substb f b1) (substb f b2)" | "substb f (Neg b) = Neg (substb f b)" text \<open>In textbooks about semantics one often finds substitution theorems, which express the relationship between substitution and evaluation. For @{typ "'a aexp"} and @{typ "'a bexp"}, we can prove such a theorem by mutual induction, followed by simplification. \<close> lemma subst_one: "evala env (substa (Var (v := a')) a) = evala (env (v := evala env a')) a" "evalb env (substb (Var (v := a')) b) = evalb (env (v := evala env a')) b" by (induct a and b) simp_all lemma subst_all: "evala env (substa s a) = evala (\<lambda>x. evala env (s x)) a" "evalb env (substb s b) = evalb (\<lambda>x. evala env (s x)) b" by (induct a and b) simp_all (*<*)end(*>*) subsubsection \<open>Example: a substitution function for terms\<close> text \<open>Functions on datatypes with nested recursion are also defined by mutual primitive recursion.\<close> (*<*)experiment begin(*>*) datatype ('a, 'b) "term" = Var 'a | App 'b "('a, 'b) term list" text \<open>A substitution function on type @{typ "('a, 'b) term"} can be defined as follows, by working simultaneously on @{typ "('a, 'b) term list"}:\<close> primrec subst_term :: "('a \<Rightarrow> ('a, 'b) term) \<Rightarrow> ('a, 'b) term \<Rightarrow> ('a, 'b) term" and subst_term_list :: "('a \<Rightarrow> ('a, 'b) term) \<Rightarrow> ('a, 'b) term list \<Rightarrow> ('a, 'b) term list" where "subst_term f (Var a) = f a" | "subst_term f (App b ts) = App b (subst_term_list f ts)" | "subst_term_list f [] = []" | "subst_term_list f (t # ts) = subst_term f t # subst_term_list f ts" text \<open>The recursion scheme follows the structure of the unfolded definition of type @{typ "('a, 'b) term"}. To prove properties of this substitution function, mutual induction is needed: \<close> lemma "subst_term (subst_term f1 \<circ> f2) t = subst_term f1 (subst_term f2 t)" and "subst_term_list (subst_term f1 \<circ> f2) ts = subst_term_list f1 (subst_term_list f2 ts)" by (induct t and ts rule: subst_term.induct subst_term_list.induct) simp_all (*<*)end(*>*) subsubsection \<open>Example: a map function for infinitely branching trees\<close> text \<open>Defining functions on infinitely branching datatypes by primitive recursion is just as easy. \<close> (*<*)experiment begin(*>*) datatype 'a tree = Atom 'a | Branch "nat \<Rightarrow> 'a tree" primrec map_tree :: "('a \<Rightarrow> 'b) \<Rightarrow> 'a tree \<Rightarrow> 'b tree" where "map_tree f (Atom a) = Atom (f a)" | "map_tree f (Branch ts) = Branch (\<lambda>x. map_tree f (ts x))" text \<open>Note that all occurrences of functions such as @{text ts} above must be applied to an argument. In particular, @{term "map_tree f \<circ> ts"} is not allowed here.\<close> text \<open>Here is a simple composition lemma for @{term map_tree}:\<close> lemma "map_tree g (map_tree f t) = map_tree (g \<circ> f) t" by (induct t) simp_all (*<*)end(*>*) subsection \<open>Proof methods related to recursive definitions\<close> text \<open> \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{method_def (HOL) pat_completeness} & : & @{text method} \\ @{method_def (HOL) relation} & : & @{text method} \\ @{method_def (HOL) lexicographic_order} & : & @{text method} \\ @{method_def (HOL) size_change} & : & @{text method} \\ @{method_def (HOL) induction_schema} & : & @{text method} \\ \end{matharray} @{rail \<open> @@{method (HOL) relation} @{syntax term} ; @@{method (HOL) lexicographic_order} (@{syntax clasimpmod} * ) ; @@{method (HOL) size_change} ( orders (@{syntax clasimpmod} * ) ) ; @@{method (HOL) induction_schema} ; orders: ( 'max' | 'min' | 'ms' ) * \<close>} \begin{description} \item @{method (HOL) pat_completeness} is a specialized method to solve goals regarding the completeness of pattern matching, as required by the @{command (HOL) "function"} package (cf.\ @{cite "isabelle-function"}). \item @{method (HOL) relation}~@{text R} introduces a termination proof using the relation @{text R}. The resulting proof state will contain goals expressing that @{text R} is wellfounded, and that the arguments of recursive calls decrease with respect to @{text R}. Usually, this method is used as the initial proof step of manual termination proofs. \item @{method (HOL) "lexicographic_order"} attempts a fully automated termination proof by searching for a lexicographic combination of size measures on the arguments of the function. The method accepts the same arguments as the @{method auto} method, which it uses internally to prove local descents. The @{syntax clasimpmod} modifiers are accepted (as for @{method auto}). In case of failure, extensive information is printed, which can help to analyse the situation (cf.\ @{cite "isabelle-function"}). \item @{method (HOL) "size_change"} also works on termination goals, using a variation of the size-change principle, together with a graph decomposition technique (see @{cite krauss_phd} for details). Three kinds of orders are used internally: @{text max}, @{text min}, and @{text ms} (multiset), which is only available when the theory @{text Multiset} is loaded. When no order kinds are given, they are tried in order. The search for a termination proof uses SAT solving internally. For local descent proofs, the @{syntax clasimpmod} modifiers are accepted (as for @{method auto}). \item @{method (HOL) induction_schema} derives user-specified induction rules from well-founded induction and completeness of patterns. This factors out some operations that are done internally by the function package and makes them available separately. See @{file "~~/src/HOL/ex/Induction_Schema.thy"} for examples. \end{description} \<close> subsection \<open>Functions with explicit partiality\<close> text \<open> \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{command_def (HOL) "partial_function"} & : & @{text "local_theory \<rightarrow> local_theory"} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) "partial_function_mono"} & : & @{text attribute} \\ \end{matharray} @{rail \<open> @@{command (HOL) partial_function} '(' @{syntax nameref} ')' @{syntax "fixes"} \<newline> @'where' @{syntax thmdecl}? @{syntax prop} \<close>} \begin{description} \item @{command (HOL) "partial_function"}~@{text "(mode)"} defines recursive functions based on fixpoints in complete partial orders. No termination proof is required from the user or constructed internally. Instead, the possibility of non-termination is modelled explicitly in the result type, which contains an explicit bottom element. Pattern matching and mutual recursion are currently not supported. Thus, the specification consists of a single function described by a single recursive equation. There are no fixed syntactic restrictions on the body of the function, but the induced functional must be provably monotonic wrt.\ the underlying order. The monotonicity proof is performed internally, and the definition is rejected when it fails. The proof can be influenced by declaring hints using the @{attribute (HOL) partial_function_mono} attribute. The mandatory @{text mode} argument specifies the mode of operation of the command, which directly corresponds to a complete partial order on the result type. By default, the following modes are defined: \begin{description} \item @{text option} defines functions that map into the @{type option} type. Here, the value @{term None} is used to model a non-terminating computation. Monotonicity requires that if @{term None} is returned by a recursive call, then the overall result must also be @{term None}. This is best achieved through the use of the monadic operator @{const "Option.bind"}. \item @{text tailrec} defines functions with an arbitrary result type and uses the slightly degenerated partial order where @{term "undefined"} is the bottom element. Now, monotonicity requires that if @{term undefined} is returned by a recursive call, then the overall result must also be @{term undefined}. In practice, this is only satisfied when each recursive call is a tail call, whose result is directly returned. Thus, this mode of operation allows the definition of arbitrary tail-recursive functions. \end{description} Experienced users may define new modes by instantiating the locale @{const "partial_function_definitions"} appropriately. \item @{attribute (HOL) partial_function_mono} declares rules for use in the internal monotonicity proofs of partial function definitions. \end{description} \<close> subsection \<open>Old-style recursive function definitions (TFL)\<close> text \<open> \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{command_def (HOL) "recdef"} & : & @{text "theory \<rightarrow> theory)"} \\ \end{matharray} The old TFL command @{command (HOL) "recdef"} for defining recursive is mostly obsolete; @{command (HOL) "function"} or @{command (HOL) "fun"} should be used instead. @{rail \<open> @@{command (HOL) recdef} ('(' @'permissive' ')')? \<newline> @{syntax name} @{syntax term} (@{syntax prop} +) hints? ; hints: '(' @'hints' ( recdefmod * ) ')' ; recdefmod: (('recdef_simp' | 'recdef_cong' | 'recdef_wf') (() | 'add' | 'del') ':' @{syntax thmrefs}) | @{syntax clasimpmod} \<close>} \begin{description} \item @{command (HOL) "recdef"} defines general well-founded recursive functions (using the TFL package), see also @{cite "isabelle-HOL"}. The ``@{text "(permissive)"}'' option tells TFL to recover from failed proof attempts, returning unfinished results. The @{text recdef_simp}, @{text recdef_cong}, and @{text recdef_wf} hints refer to auxiliary rules to be used in the internal automated proof process of TFL. Additional @{syntax clasimpmod} declarations may be given to tune the context of the Simplifier (cf.\ \secref{sec:simplifier}) and Classical reasoner (cf.\ \secref{sec:classical}). \end{description} \medskip Hints for @{command (HOL) "recdef"} may be also declared globally, using the following attributes. \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{attribute_def (HOL) recdef_simp} & : & @{text attribute} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) recdef_cong} & : & @{text attribute} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) recdef_wf} & : & @{text attribute} \\ \end{matharray} @{rail \<open> (@@{attribute (HOL) recdef_simp} | @@{attribute (HOL) recdef_cong} | @@{attribute (HOL) recdef_wf}) (() | 'add' | 'del') \<close>} \<close> section \<open>Old-style datatypes \label{sec:hol-datatype}\<close> text \<open> \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{command_def (HOL) "old_datatype"} & : & @{text "theory \<rightarrow> theory"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "old_rep_datatype"} & : & @{text "theory \<rightarrow> proof(prove)"} \\ \end{matharray} @{rail \<open> @@{command (HOL) old_datatype} (spec + @'and') ; @@{command (HOL) old_rep_datatype} ('(' (@{syntax name} +) ')')? (@{syntax term} +) ; spec: @{syntax typespec_sorts} @{syntax mixfix}? '=' (cons + '|') ; cons: @{syntax name} (@{syntax type} * ) @{syntax mixfix}? \<close>} \begin{description} \item @{command (HOL) "old_datatype"} defines old-style inductive datatypes in HOL. \item @{command (HOL) "old_rep_datatype"} represents existing types as old-style datatypes. \end{description} These commands are mostly obsolete; @{command (HOL) "datatype"} should be used instead. See @{cite "isabelle-HOL"} for more details on datatypes, but beware of the old-style theory syntax being used there! Apart from proper proof methods for case-analysis and induction, there are also emulations of ML tactics @{method (HOL) case_tac} and @{method (HOL) induct_tac} available, see \secref{sec:hol-induct-tac}; these admit to refer directly to the internal structure of subgoals (including internally bound parameters). \<close> subsubsection \<open>Examples\<close> text \<open>We define a type of finite sequences, with slightly different names than the existing @{typ "'a list"} that is already in @{theory Main}:\<close> (*<*)experiment begin(*>*) datatype 'a seq = Empty | Seq 'a "'a seq" text \<open>We can now prove some simple lemma by structural induction:\<close> lemma "Seq x xs \<noteq> xs" proof (induct xs arbitrary: x) case Empty txt \<open>This case can be proved using the simplifier: the freeness properties of the datatype are already declared as @{attribute simp} rules.\<close> show "Seq x Empty \<noteq> Empty" by simp next case (Seq y ys) txt \<open>The step case is proved similarly.\<close> show "Seq x (Seq y ys) \<noteq> Seq y ys" using \<open>Seq y ys \<noteq> ys\<close> by simp qed text \<open>Here is a more succinct version of the same proof:\<close> lemma "Seq x xs \<noteq> xs" by (induct xs arbitrary: x) simp_all (*<*)end(*>*) section \<open>Records \label{sec:hol-record}\<close> text \<open> In principle, records merely generalize the concept of tuples, where components may be addressed by labels instead of just position. The logical infrastructure of records in Isabelle/HOL is slightly more advanced, though, supporting truly extensible record schemes. This admits operations that are polymorphic with respect to record extension, yielding ``object-oriented'' effects like (single) inheritance. See also @{cite "NaraschewskiW-TPHOLs98"} for more details on object-oriented verification and record subtyping in HOL. \<close> subsection \<open>Basic concepts\<close> text \<open> Isabelle/HOL supports both \emph{fixed} and \emph{schematic} records at the level of terms and types. The notation is as follows: \begin{center} \begin{tabular}{l|l|l} & record terms & record types \\ \hline fixed & @{text "\<lparr>x = a, y = b\<rparr>"} & @{text "\<lparr>x :: A, y :: B\<rparr>"} \\ schematic & @{text "\<lparr>x = a, y = b, \<dots> = m\<rparr>"} & @{text "\<lparr>x :: A, y :: B, \<dots> :: M\<rparr>"} \\ \end{tabular} \end{center} \noindent The ASCII representation of @{text "\<lparr>x = a\<rparr>"} is @{text "(| x = a |)"}. A fixed record @{text "\<lparr>x = a, y = b\<rparr>"} has field @{text x} of value @{text a} and field @{text y} of value @{text b}. The corresponding type is @{text "\<lparr>x :: A, y :: B\<rparr>"}, assuming that @{text "a :: A"} and @{text "b :: B"}. A record scheme like @{text "\<lparr>x = a, y = b, \<dots> = m\<rparr>"} contains fields @{text x} and @{text y} as before, but also possibly further fields as indicated by the ``@{text "\<dots>"}'' notation (which is actually part of the syntax). The improper field ``@{text "\<dots>"}'' of a record scheme is called the \emph{more part}. Logically it is just a free variable, which is occasionally referred to as ``row variable'' in the literature. The more part of a record scheme may be instantiated by zero or more further components. For example, the previous scheme may get instantiated to @{text "\<lparr>x = a, y = b, z = c, \<dots> = m'\<rparr>"}, where @{text m'} refers to a different more part. Fixed records are special instances of record schemes, where ``@{text "\<dots>"}'' is properly terminated by the @{text "() :: unit"} element. In fact, @{text "\<lparr>x = a, y = b\<rparr>"} is just an abbreviation for @{text "\<lparr>x = a, y = b, \<dots> = ()\<rparr>"}. \medskip Two key observations make extensible records in a simply typed language like HOL work out: \begin{enumerate} \item the more part is internalized, as a free term or type variable, \item field names are externalized, they cannot be accessed within the logic as first-class values. \end{enumerate} \medskip In Isabelle/HOL record types have to be defined explicitly, fixing their field names and types, and their (optional) parent record. Afterwards, records may be formed using above syntax, while obeying the canonical order of fields as given by their declaration. The record package provides several standard operations like selectors and updates. The common setup for various generic proof tools enable succinct reasoning patterns. See also the Isabelle/HOL tutorial @{cite "isabelle-hol-book"} for further instructions on using records in practice. \<close> subsection \<open>Record specifications\<close> text \<open> \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{command_def (HOL) "record"} & : & @{text "theory \<rightarrow> theory"} \\ \end{matharray} @{rail \<open> @@{command (HOL) record} @{syntax typespec_sorts} '=' \<newline> (@{syntax type} '+')? (constdecl +) ; constdecl: @{syntax name} '::' @{syntax type} @{syntax mixfix}? \<close>} \begin{description} \item @{command (HOL) "record"}~@{text "(\<alpha>\<^sub>1, \<dots>, \<alpha>\<^sub>m) t = \<tau> + c\<^sub>1 :: \<sigma>\<^sub>1 \<dots> c\<^sub>n :: \<sigma>\<^sub>n"} defines extensible record type @{text "(\<alpha>\<^sub>1, \<dots>, \<alpha>\<^sub>m) t"}, derived from the optional parent record @{text "\<tau>"} by adding new field components @{text "c\<^sub>i :: \<sigma>\<^sub>i"} etc. The type variables of @{text "\<tau>"} and @{text "\<sigma>\<^sub>i"} need to be covered by the (distinct) parameters @{text "\<alpha>\<^sub>1, \<dots>, \<alpha>\<^sub>m"}. Type constructor @{text t} has to be new, while @{text \<tau>} needs to specify an instance of an existing record type. At least one new field @{text "c\<^sub>i"} has to be specified. Basically, field names need to belong to a unique record. This is not a real restriction in practice, since fields are qualified by the record name internally. The parent record specification @{text \<tau>} is optional; if omitted @{text t} becomes a root record. The hierarchy of all records declared within a theory context forms a forest structure, i.e.\ a set of trees starting with a root record each. There is no way to merge multiple parent records! For convenience, @{text "(\<alpha>\<^sub>1, \<dots>, \<alpha>\<^sub>m) t"} is made a type abbreviation for the fixed record type @{text "\<lparr>c\<^sub>1 :: \<sigma>\<^sub>1, \<dots>, c\<^sub>n :: \<sigma>\<^sub>n\<rparr>"}, likewise is @{text "(\<alpha>\<^sub>1, \<dots>, \<alpha>\<^sub>m, \<zeta>) t_scheme"} made an abbreviation for @{text "\<lparr>c\<^sub>1 :: \<sigma>\<^sub>1, \<dots>, c\<^sub>n :: \<sigma>\<^sub>n, \<dots> :: \<zeta>\<rparr>"}. \end{description} \<close> subsection \<open>Record operations\<close> text \<open> Any record definition of the form presented above produces certain standard operations. Selectors and updates are provided for any field, including the improper one ``@{text more}''. There are also cumulative record constructor functions. To simplify the presentation below, we assume for now that @{text "(\<alpha>\<^sub>1, \<dots>, \<alpha>\<^sub>m) t"} is a root record with fields @{text "c\<^sub>1 :: \<sigma>\<^sub>1, \<dots>, c\<^sub>n :: \<sigma>\<^sub>n"}. \medskip \textbf{Selectors} and \textbf{updates} are available for any field (including ``@{text more}''): \begin{matharray}{lll} @{text "c\<^sub>i"} & @{text "::"} & @{text "\<lparr>\<^vec>c :: \<^vec>\<sigma>, \<dots> :: \<zeta>\<rparr> \<Rightarrow> \<sigma>\<^sub>i"} \\ @{text "c\<^sub>i_update"} & @{text "::"} & @{text "\<sigma>\<^sub>i \<Rightarrow> \<lparr>\<^vec>c :: \<^vec>\<sigma>, \<dots> :: \<zeta>\<rparr> \<Rightarrow> \<lparr>\<^vec>c :: \<^vec>\<sigma>, \<dots> :: \<zeta>\<rparr>"} \\ \end{matharray} There is special syntax for application of updates: @{text "r\<lparr>x := a\<rparr>"} abbreviates term @{text "x_update a r"}. Further notation for repeated updates is also available: @{text "r\<lparr>x := a\<rparr>\<lparr>y := b\<rparr>\<lparr>z := c\<rparr>"} may be written @{text "r\<lparr>x := a, y := b, z := c\<rparr>"}. Note that because of postfix notation the order of fields shown here is reverse than in the actual term. Since repeated updates are just function applications, fields may be freely permuted in @{text "\<lparr>x := a, y := b, z := c\<rparr>"}, as far as logical equality is concerned. Thus commutativity of independent updates can be proven within the logic for any two fields, but not as a general theorem. \medskip The \textbf{make} operation provides a cumulative record constructor function: \begin{matharray}{lll} @{text "t.make"} & @{text "::"} & @{text "\<sigma>\<^sub>1 \<Rightarrow> \<dots> \<sigma>\<^sub>n \<Rightarrow> \<lparr>\<^vec>c :: \<^vec>\<sigma>\<rparr>"} \\ \end{matharray} \medskip We now reconsider the case of non-root records, which are derived of some parent. In general, the latter may depend on another parent as well, resulting in a list of \emph{ancestor records}. Appending the lists of fields of all ancestors results in a certain field prefix. The record package automatically takes care of this by lifting operations over this context of ancestor fields. Assuming that @{text "(\<alpha>\<^sub>1, \<dots>, \<alpha>\<^sub>m) t"} has ancestor fields @{text "b\<^sub>1 :: \<rho>\<^sub>1, \<dots>, b\<^sub>k :: \<rho>\<^sub>k"}, the above record operations will get the following types: \medskip \begin{tabular}{lll} @{text "c\<^sub>i"} & @{text "::"} & @{text "\<lparr>\<^vec>b :: \<^vec>\<rho>, \<^vec>c :: \<^vec>\<sigma>, \<dots> :: \<zeta>\<rparr> \<Rightarrow> \<sigma>\<^sub>i"} \\ @{text "c\<^sub>i_update"} & @{text "::"} & @{text "\<sigma>\<^sub>i \<Rightarrow> \<lparr>\<^vec>b :: \<^vec>\<rho>, \<^vec>c :: \<^vec>\<sigma>, \<dots> :: \<zeta>\<rparr> \<Rightarrow> \<lparr>\<^vec>b :: \<^vec>\<rho>, \<^vec>c :: \<^vec>\<sigma>, \<dots> :: \<zeta>\<rparr>"} \\ @{text "t.make"} & @{text "::"} & @{text "\<rho>\<^sub>1 \<Rightarrow> \<dots> \<rho>\<^sub>k \<Rightarrow> \<sigma>\<^sub>1 \<Rightarrow> \<dots> \<sigma>\<^sub>n \<Rightarrow> \<lparr>\<^vec>b :: \<^vec>\<rho>, \<^vec>c :: \<^vec>\<sigma>\<rparr>"} \\ \end{tabular} \medskip \noindent Some further operations address the extension aspect of a derived record scheme specifically: @{text "t.fields"} produces a record fragment consisting of exactly the new fields introduced here (the result may serve as a more part elsewhere); @{text "t.extend"} takes a fixed record and adds a given more part; @{text "t.truncate"} restricts a record scheme to a fixed record. \medskip \begin{tabular}{lll} @{text "t.fields"} & @{text "::"} & @{text "\<sigma>\<^sub>1 \<Rightarrow> \<dots> \<sigma>\<^sub>n \<Rightarrow> \<lparr>\<^vec>c :: \<^vec>\<sigma>\<rparr>"} \\ @{text "t.extend"} & @{text "::"} & @{text "\<lparr>\<^vec>b :: \<^vec>\<rho>, \<^vec>c :: \<^vec>\<sigma>\<rparr> \<Rightarrow> \<zeta> \<Rightarrow> \<lparr>\<^vec>b :: \<^vec>\<rho>, \<^vec>c :: \<^vec>\<sigma>, \<dots> :: \<zeta>\<rparr>"} \\ @{text "t.truncate"} & @{text "::"} & @{text "\<lparr>\<^vec>b :: \<^vec>\<rho>, \<^vec>c :: \<^vec>\<sigma>, \<dots> :: \<zeta>\<rparr> \<Rightarrow> \<lparr>\<^vec>b :: \<^vec>\<rho>, \<^vec>c :: \<^vec>\<sigma>\<rparr>"} \\ \end{tabular} \medskip \noindent Note that @{text "t.make"} and @{text "t.fields"} coincide for root records. \<close> subsection \<open>Derived rules and proof tools\<close> text \<open> The record package proves several results internally, declaring these facts to appropriate proof tools. This enables users to reason about record structures quite conveniently. Assume that @{text t} is a record type as specified above. \begin{enumerate} \item Standard conversions for selectors or updates applied to record constructor terms are made part of the default Simplifier context; thus proofs by reduction of basic operations merely require the @{method simp} method without further arguments. These rules are available as @{text "t.simps"}, too. \item Selectors applied to updated records are automatically reduced by an internal simplification procedure, which is also part of the standard Simplifier setup. \item Inject equations of a form analogous to @{prop "(x, y) = (x', y') \<equiv> x = x' \<and> y = y'"} are declared to the Simplifier and Classical Reasoner as @{attribute iff} rules. These rules are available as @{text "t.iffs"}. \item The introduction rule for record equality analogous to @{text "x r = x r' \<Longrightarrow> y r = y r' \<dots> \<Longrightarrow> r = r'"} is declared to the Simplifier, and as the basic rule context as ``@{attribute intro}@{text "?"}''. The rule is called @{text "t.equality"}. \item Representations of arbitrary record expressions as canonical constructor terms are provided both in @{method cases} and @{method induct} format (cf.\ the generic proof methods of the same name, \secref{sec:cases-induct}). Several variations are available, for fixed records, record schemes, more parts etc. The generic proof methods are sufficiently smart to pick the most sensible rule according to the type of the indicated record expression: users just need to apply something like ``@{text "(cases r)"}'' to a certain proof problem. \item The derived record operations @{text "t.make"}, @{text "t.fields"}, @{text "t.extend"}, @{text "t.truncate"} are \emph{not} treated automatically, but usually need to be expanded by hand, using the collective fact @{text "t.defs"}. \end{enumerate} \<close> subsubsection \<open>Examples\<close> text \<open>See @{file "~~/src/HOL/ex/Records.thy"}, for example.\<close> section \<open>Typedef axiomatization \label{sec:hol-typedef}\<close> text \<open> \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{command_def (HOL) "typedef"} & : & @{text "local_theory \<rightarrow> proof(prove)"} \\ \end{matharray} A Gordon/HOL-style type definition is a certain axiom scheme that identifies a new type with a subset of an existing type. More precisely, the new type is defined by exhibiting an existing type @{text \<tau>}, a set @{text "A :: \<tau> set"}, and a theorem that proves @{prop "\<exists>x. x \<in> A"}. Thus @{text A} is a non-empty subset of @{text \<tau>}, and the new type denotes this subset. New functions are postulated that establish an isomorphism between the new type and the subset. In general, the type @{text \<tau>} may involve type variables @{text "\<alpha>\<^sub>1, \<dots>, \<alpha>\<^sub>n"} which means that the type definition produces a type constructor @{text "(\<alpha>\<^sub>1, \<dots>, \<alpha>\<^sub>n) t"} depending on those type arguments. The axiomatization can be considered a ``definition'' in the sense of the particular set-theoretic interpretation of HOL @{cite pitts93}, where the universe of types is required to be downwards-closed wrt.\ arbitrary non-empty subsets. Thus genuinely new types introduced by @{command "typedef"} stay within the range of HOL models by construction. In contrast, the command @{command_ref type_synonym} from Isabelle/Pure merely introduces syntactic abbreviations, without any logical significance. Thus it is more faithful to the idea of a genuine type definition, but less powerful in practice. @{rail \<open> @@{command (HOL) typedef} abs_type '=' rep_set ; abs_type: @{syntax typespec_sorts} @{syntax mixfix}? ; rep_set: @{syntax term} (@'morphisms' @{syntax name} @{syntax name})? \<close>} \begin{description} \item @{command (HOL) "typedef"}~@{text "(\<alpha>\<^sub>1, \<dots>, \<alpha>\<^sub>n) t = A"} produces an axiomatization (\secref{sec:axiomatizations}) for a type definition in the background theory of the current context, depending on a non-emptiness result of the set @{text A} that needs to be proven here. The set @{text A} may contain type variables @{text "\<alpha>\<^sub>1, \<dots>, \<alpha>\<^sub>n"} as specified on the LHS, but no term variables. Even though a local theory specification, the newly introduced type constructor cannot depend on parameters or assumptions of the context: this is structurally impossible in HOL. In contrast, the non-emptiness proof may use local assumptions in unusual situations, which could result in different interpretations in target contexts: the meaning of the bijection between the representing set @{text A} and the new type @{text t} may then change in different application contexts. For @{command (HOL) "typedef"}~@{text "t = A"} the newly introduced type @{text t} is accompanied by a pair of morphisms to relate it to the representing set over the old type. By default, the injection from type to set is called @{text Rep_t} and its inverse @{text Abs_t}: An explicit @{keyword (HOL) "morphisms"} specification allows to provide alternative names. The core axiomatization uses the locale predicate @{const type_definition} as defined in Isabelle/HOL. Various basic consequences of that are instantiated accordingly, re-using the locale facts with names derived from the new type constructor. Thus the generic @{thm type_definition.Rep} is turned into the specific @{text "Rep_t"}, for example. Theorems @{thm type_definition.Rep}, @{thm type_definition.Rep_inverse}, and @{thm type_definition.Abs_inverse} provide the most basic characterization as a corresponding injection/surjection pair (in both directions). The derived rules @{thm type_definition.Rep_inject} and @{thm type_definition.Abs_inject} provide a more convenient version of injectivity, suitable for automated proof tools (e.g.\ in declarations involving @{attribute simp} or @{attribute iff}). Furthermore, the rules @{thm type_definition.Rep_cases}~/ @{thm type_definition.Rep_induct}, and @{thm type_definition.Abs_cases}~/ @{thm type_definition.Abs_induct} provide alternative views on surjectivity. These rules are already declared as set or type rules for the generic @{method cases} and @{method induct} methods, respectively. \end{description} \<close> subsubsection \<open>Examples\<close> text \<open>Type definitions permit the introduction of abstract data types in a safe way, namely by providing models based on already existing types. Given some abstract axiomatic description @{text P} of a type, this involves two steps: \begin{enumerate} \item Find an appropriate type @{text \<tau>} and subset @{text A} which has the desired properties @{text P}, and make a type definition based on this representation. \item Prove that @{text P} holds for @{text \<tau>} by lifting @{text P} from the representation. \end{enumerate} You can later forget about the representation and work solely in terms of the abstract properties @{text P}. \medskip The following trivial example pulls a three-element type into existence within the formal logical environment of HOL.\<close> (*<*)experiment begin(*>*) typedef three = "{(True, True), (True, False), (False, True)}" by blast definition "One = Abs_three (True, True)" definition "Two = Abs_three (True, False)" definition "Three = Abs_three (False, True)" lemma three_distinct: "One \<noteq> Two" "One \<noteq> Three" "Two \<noteq> Three" by (simp_all add: One_def Two_def Three_def Abs_three_inject) lemma three_cases: fixes x :: three obtains "x = One" | "x = Two" | "x = Three" by (cases x) (auto simp: One_def Two_def Three_def Abs_three_inject) (*<*)end(*>*) text \<open>Note that such trivial constructions are better done with derived specification mechanisms such as @{command datatype}:\<close> (*<*)experiment begin(*>*) datatype three = One | Two | Three (*<*)end(*>*) text \<open>This avoids re-doing basic definitions and proofs from the primitive @{command typedef} above.\<close> section \<open>Functorial structure of types\<close> text \<open> \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{command_def (HOL) "functor"} & : & @{text "local_theory \<rightarrow> proof(prove)"} \end{matharray} @{rail \<open> @@{command (HOL) functor} (@{syntax name} ':')? @{syntax term} \<close>} \begin{description} \item @{command (HOL) "functor"}~@{text "prefix: m"} allows to prove and register properties about the functorial structure of type constructors. These properties then can be used by other packages to deal with those type constructors in certain type constructions. Characteristic theorems are noted in the current local theory. By default, they are prefixed with the base name of the type constructor, an explicit prefix can be given alternatively. The given term @{text "m"} is considered as \emph{mapper} for the corresponding type constructor and must conform to the following type pattern: \begin{matharray}{lll} @{text "m"} & @{text "::"} & @{text "\<sigma>\<^sub>1 \<Rightarrow> \<dots> \<sigma>\<^sub>k \<Rightarrow> (\<^vec>\<alpha>\<^sub>n) t \<Rightarrow> (\<^vec>\<beta>\<^sub>n) t"} \\ \end{matharray} \noindent where @{text t} is the type constructor, @{text "\<^vec>\<alpha>\<^sub>n"} and @{text "\<^vec>\<beta>\<^sub>n"} are distinct type variables free in the local theory and @{text "\<sigma>\<^sub>1"}, \ldots, @{text "\<sigma>\<^sub>k"} is a subsequence of @{text "\<alpha>\<^sub>1 \<Rightarrow> \<beta>\<^sub>1"}, @{text "\<beta>\<^sub>1 \<Rightarrow> \<alpha>\<^sub>1"}, \ldots, @{text "\<alpha>\<^sub>n \<Rightarrow> \<beta>\<^sub>n"}, @{text "\<beta>\<^sub>n \<Rightarrow> \<alpha>\<^sub>n"}. \end{description} \<close> section \<open>Quotient types\<close> text \<open> \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{command_def (HOL) "quotient_type"} & : & @{text "local_theory \<rightarrow> proof(prove)"}\\ @{command_def (HOL) "quotient_definition"} & : & @{text "local_theory \<rightarrow> proof(prove)"}\\ @{command_def (HOL) "print_quotmapsQ3"} & : & @{text "context \<rightarrow>"}\\ @{command_def (HOL) "print_quotientsQ3"} & : & @{text "context \<rightarrow>"}\\ @{command_def (HOL) "print_quotconsts"} & : & @{text "context \<rightarrow>"}\\ @{method_def (HOL) "lifting"} & : & @{text method} \\ @{method_def (HOL) "lifting_setup"} & : & @{text method} \\ @{method_def (HOL) "descending"} & : & @{text method} \\ @{method_def (HOL) "descending_setup"} & : & @{text method} \\ @{method_def (HOL) "partiality_descending"} & : & @{text method} \\ @{method_def (HOL) "partiality_descending_setup"} & : & @{text method} \\ @{method_def (HOL) "regularize"} & : & @{text method} \\ @{method_def (HOL) "injection"} & : & @{text method} \\ @{method_def (HOL) "cleaning"} & : & @{text method} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) "quot_thm"} & : & @{text attribute} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) "quot_lifted"} & : & @{text attribute} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) "quot_respect"} & : & @{text attribute} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) "quot_preserve"} & : & @{text attribute} \\ \end{matharray} The quotient package defines a new quotient type given a raw type and a partial equivalence relation. The package also historically includes automation for transporting definitions and theorems. But most of this automation was superseded by the Lifting and Transfer packages. The user should consider using these two new packages for lifting definitions and transporting theorems. @{rail \<open> @@{command (HOL) quotient_type} (spec) ; spec: @{syntax typespec} @{syntax mixfix}? '=' \<newline> @{syntax type} '/' ('partial' ':')? @{syntax term} \<newline> (@'morphisms' @{syntax name} @{syntax name})? (@'parametric' @{syntax thmref})? \<close>} @{rail \<open> @@{command (HOL) quotient_definition} constdecl? @{syntax thmdecl}? \<newline> @{syntax term} 'is' @{syntax term} ; constdecl: @{syntax name} ('::' @{syntax type})? @{syntax mixfix}? \<close>} @{rail \<open> @@{method (HOL) lifting} @{syntax thmrefs}? ; @@{method (HOL) lifting_setup} @{syntax thmrefs}? \<close>} \begin{description} \item @{command (HOL) "quotient_type"} defines a new quotient type @{text \<tau>}. The injection from a quotient type to a raw type is called @{text rep_\<tau>}, its inverse @{text abs_\<tau>} unless explicit @{keyword (HOL) "morphisms"} specification provides alternative names. @{command (HOL) "quotient_type"} requires the user to prove that the relation is an equivalence relation (predicate @{text equivp}), unless the user specifies explicitly @{text partial} in which case the obligation is @{text part_equivp}. A quotient defined with @{text partial} is weaker in the sense that less things can be proved automatically. The command internally proves a Quotient theorem and sets up the Lifting package by the command @{command (HOL) setup_lifting}. Thus the Lifting and Transfer packages can be used also with quotient types defined by @{command (HOL) "quotient_type"} without any extra set-up. The parametricity theorem for the equivalence relation R can be provided as an extra argument of the command and is passed to the corresponding internal call of @{command (HOL) setup_lifting}. This theorem allows the Lifting package to generate a stronger transfer rule for equality. \end{description} The most of the rest of the package was superseded by the Lifting and Transfer packages. The user should consider using these two new packages for lifting definitions and transporting theorems. \begin{description} \item @{command (HOL) "quotient_definition"} defines a constant on the quotient type. \item @{command (HOL) "print_quotmapsQ3"} prints quotient map functions. \item @{command (HOL) "print_quotientsQ3"} prints quotients. \item @{command (HOL) "print_quotconsts"} prints quotient constants. \item @{method (HOL) "lifting"} and @{method (HOL) "lifting_setup"} methods match the current goal with the given raw theorem to be lifted producing three new subgoals: regularization, injection and cleaning subgoals. @{method (HOL) "lifting"} tries to apply the heuristics for automatically solving these three subgoals and leaves only the subgoals unsolved by the heuristics to the user as opposed to @{method (HOL) "lifting_setup"} which leaves the three subgoals unsolved. \item @{method (HOL) "descending"} and @{method (HOL) "descending_setup"} try to guess a raw statement that would lift to the current subgoal. Such statement is assumed as a new subgoal and @{method (HOL) "descending"} continues in the same way as @{method (HOL) "lifting"} does. @{method (HOL) "descending"} tries to solve the arising regularization, injection and cleaning subgoals with the analogous method @{method (HOL) "descending_setup"} which leaves the four unsolved subgoals. \item @{method (HOL) "partiality_descending"} finds the regularized theorem that would lift to the current subgoal, lifts it and leaves as a subgoal. This method can be used with partial equivalence quotients where the non regularized statements would not be true. @{method (HOL) "partiality_descending_setup"} leaves the injection and cleaning subgoals unchanged. \item @{method (HOL) "regularize"} applies the regularization heuristics to the current subgoal. \item @{method (HOL) "injection"} applies the injection heuristics to the current goal using the stored quotient respectfulness theorems. \item @{method (HOL) "cleaning"} applies the injection cleaning heuristics to the current subgoal using the stored quotient preservation theorems. \item @{attribute (HOL) quot_lifted} attribute tries to automatically transport the theorem to the quotient type. The attribute uses all the defined quotients types and quotient constants often producing undesired results or theorems that cannot be lifted. \item @{attribute (HOL) quot_respect} and @{attribute (HOL) quot_preserve} attributes declare a theorem as a respectfulness and preservation theorem respectively. These are stored in the local theory store and used by the @{method (HOL) "injection"} and @{method (HOL) "cleaning"} methods respectively. \item @{attribute (HOL) quot_thm} declares that a certain theorem is a quotient extension theorem. Quotient extension theorems allow for quotienting inside container types. Given a polymorphic type that serves as a container, a map function defined for this container using @{command (HOL) "functor"} and a relation map defined for for the container type, the quotient extension theorem should be @{term "Quotient3 R Abs Rep \<Longrightarrow> Quotient3 (rel_map R) (map Abs) (map Rep)"}. Quotient extension theorems are stored in a database and are used all the steps of lifting theorems. \end{description} \<close> section \<open>Definition by specification \label{sec:hol-specification}\<close> text \<open> \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{command_def (HOL) "specification"} & : & @{text "theory \<rightarrow> proof(prove)"} \\ \end{matharray} @{rail \<open> @@{command (HOL) specification} '(' (decl +) ')' \<newline> (@{syntax thmdecl}? @{syntax prop} +) ; decl: (@{syntax name} ':')? @{syntax term} ('(' @'overloaded' ')')? \<close>} \begin{description} \item @{command (HOL) "specification"}~@{text "decls \<phi>"} sets up a goal stating the existence of terms with the properties specified to hold for the constants given in @{text decls}. After finishing the proof, the theory will be augmented with definitions for the given constants, as well as with theorems stating the properties for these constants. @{text decl} declares a constant to be defined by the specification given. The definition for the constant @{text c} is bound to the name @{text c_def} unless a theorem name is given in the declaration. Overloaded constants should be declared as such. \end{description} \<close> section \<open>Adhoc overloading of constants\<close> text \<open> \begin{tabular}{rcll} @{command_def "adhoc_overloading"} & : & @{text "local_theory \<rightarrow> local_theory"} \\ @{command_def "no_adhoc_overloading"} & : & @{text "local_theory \<rightarrow> local_theory"} \\ @{attribute_def "show_variants"} & : & @{text "attribute"} & default @{text false} \\ \end{tabular} \medskip Adhoc overloading allows to overload a constant depending on its type. Typically this involves the introduction of an uninterpreted constant (used for input and output) and the addition of some variants (used internally). For examples see @{file "~~/src/HOL/ex/Adhoc_Overloading_Examples.thy"} and @{file "~~/src/HOL/Library/Monad_Syntax.thy"}. @{rail \<open> (@@{command adhoc_overloading} | @@{command no_adhoc_overloading}) (@{syntax nameref} (@{syntax term} + ) + @'and') \<close>} \begin{description} \item @{command "adhoc_overloading"}~@{text "c v\<^sub>1 ... v\<^sub>n"} associates variants with an existing constant. \item @{command "no_adhoc_overloading"} is similar to @{command "adhoc_overloading"}, but removes the specified variants from the present context. \item @{attribute "show_variants"} controls printing of variants of overloaded constants. If enabled, the internally used variants are printed instead of their respective overloaded constants. This is occasionally useful to check whether the system agrees with a user's expectations about derived variants. \end{description} \<close> chapter \<open>Proof tools\<close> section \<open>Adhoc tuples\<close> text \<open> \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{attribute_def (HOL) split_format}@{text "\<^sup>*"} & : & @{text attribute} \\ \end{matharray} @{rail \<open> @@{attribute (HOL) split_format} ('(' 'complete' ')')? \<close>} \begin{description} \item @{attribute (HOL) split_format}\ @{text "(complete)"} causes arguments in function applications to be represented canonically according to their tuple type structure. Note that this operation tends to invent funny names for new local parameters introduced. \end{description} \<close> section \<open>Transfer package\<close> text \<open> \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{method_def (HOL) "transfer"} & : & @{text method} \\ @{method_def (HOL) "transfer'"} & : & @{text method} \\ @{method_def (HOL) "transfer_prover"} & : & @{text method} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) "Transfer.transferred"} & : & @{text attribute} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) "untransferred"} & : & @{text attribute} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) "transfer_rule"} & : & @{text attribute} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) "transfer_domain_rule"} & : & @{text attribute} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) "relator_eq"} & : & @{text attribute} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) "relator_domain"} & : & @{text attribute} \\ \end{matharray} \begin{description} \item @{method (HOL) "transfer"} method replaces the current subgoal with a logically equivalent one that uses different types and constants. The replacement of types and constants is guided by the database of transfer rules. Goals are generalized over all free variables by default; this is necessary for variables whose types change, but can be overridden for specific variables with e.g. @{text "transfer fixing: x y z"}. \item @{method (HOL) "transfer'"} is a variant of @{method (HOL) transfer} that allows replacing a subgoal with one that is logically stronger (rather than equivalent). For example, a subgoal involving equality on a quotient type could be replaced with a subgoal involving equality (instead of the corresponding equivalence relation) on the underlying raw type. \item @{method (HOL) "transfer_prover"} method assists with proving a transfer rule for a new constant, provided the constant is defined in terms of other constants that already have transfer rules. It should be applied after unfolding the constant definitions. \item @{attribute (HOL) "untransferred"} proves the same equivalent theorem as @{method (HOL) "transfer"} internally does. \item @{attribute (HOL) Transfer.transferred} works in the opposite direction than @{method (HOL) "transfer'"}. E.g., given the transfer relation @{text "ZN x n \<equiv> (x = int n)"}, corresponding transfer rules and the theorem @{text "\<forall>x::int \<in> {0..}. x < x + 1"}, the attribute would prove @{text "\<forall>n::nat. n < n + 1"}. The attribute is still in experimental phase of development. \item @{attribute (HOL) "transfer_rule"} attribute maintains a collection of transfer rules, which relate constants at two different types. Typical transfer rules may relate different type instances of the same polymorphic constant, or they may relate an operation on a raw type to a corresponding operation on an abstract type (quotient or subtype). For example: @{text "((A ===> B) ===> list_all2 A ===> list_all2 B) map map"}\\ @{text "(cr_int ===> cr_int ===> cr_int) (\<lambda>(x,y) (u,v). (x+u, y+v)) plus"} Lemmas involving predicates on relations can also be registered using the same attribute. For example: @{text "bi_unique A \<Longrightarrow> (list_all2 A ===> op =) distinct distinct"}\\ @{text "\<lbrakk>bi_unique A; bi_unique B\<rbrakk> \<Longrightarrow> bi_unique (rel_prod A B)"} Preservation of predicates on relations (@{text "bi_unique, bi_total, right_unique, right_total, left_unique, left_total"}) with the respect to a relator is proved automatically if the involved type is BNF @{cite "isabelle-datatypes"} without dead variables. \item @{attribute (HOL) "transfer_domain_rule"} attribute maintains a collection of rules, which specify a domain of a transfer relation by a predicate. E.g., given the transfer relation @{text "ZN x n \<equiv> (x = int n)"}, one can register the following transfer domain rule: @{text "Domainp ZN = (\<lambda>x. x \<ge> 0)"}. The rules allow the package to produce more readable transferred goals, e.g., when quantifiers are transferred. \item @{attribute (HOL) relator_eq} attribute collects identity laws for relators of various type constructors, e.g. @{term "rel_set (op =) = (op =)"}. The @{method (HOL) transfer} method uses these lemmas to infer transfer rules for non-polymorphic constants on the fly. For examples see @{file "~~/src/HOL/Lifting_Set.thy"} or @{file "~~/src/HOL/Lifting.thy"}. This property is proved automatically if the involved type is BNF without dead variables. \item @{attribute_def (HOL) "relator_domain"} attribute collects rules describing domains of relators by predicators. E.g., @{term "Domainp (rel_set T) = (\<lambda>A. Ball A (Domainp T))"}. This allows the package to lift transfer domain rules through type constructors. For examples see @{file "~~/src/HOL/Lifting_Set.thy"} or @{file "~~/src/HOL/Lifting.thy"}. This property is proved automatically if the involved type is BNF without dead variables. \end{description} Theoretical background can be found in @{cite "Huffman-Kuncar:2013:lifting_transfer"}. \<close> section \<open>Lifting package\<close> text \<open> The Lifting package allows users to lift terms of the raw type to the abstract type, which is a necessary step in building a library for an abstract type. Lifting defines a new constant by combining coercion functions (Abs and Rep) with the raw term. It also proves an appropriate transfer rule for the Transfer package and, if possible, an equation for the code generator. The Lifting package provides two main commands: @{command (HOL) "setup_lifting"} for initializing the package to work with a new type, and @{command (HOL) "lift_definition"} for lifting constants. The Lifting package works with all four kinds of type abstraction: type copies, subtypes, total quotients and partial quotients. Theoretical background can be found in @{cite "Huffman-Kuncar:2013:lifting_transfer"}. \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{command_def (HOL) "setup_lifting"} & : & @{text "local_theory \<rightarrow> local_theory"}\\ @{command_def (HOL) "lift_definition"} & : & @{text "local_theory \<rightarrow> proof(prove)"}\\ @{command_def (HOL) "lifting_forget"} & : & @{text "local_theory \<rightarrow> local_theory"}\\ @{command_def (HOL) "lifting_update"} & : & @{text "local_theory \<rightarrow> local_theory"}\\ @{command_def (HOL) "print_quot_maps"} & : & @{text "context \<rightarrow>"}\\ @{command_def (HOL) "print_quotients"} & : & @{text "context \<rightarrow>"}\\ @{attribute_def (HOL) "quot_map"} & : & @{text attribute} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) "relator_eq_onp"} & : & @{text attribute} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) "relator_mono"} & : & @{text attribute} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) "relator_distr"} & : & @{text attribute} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) "quot_del"} & : & @{text attribute} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) "lifting_restore"} & : & @{text attribute} \\ \end{matharray} @{rail \<open> @@{command (HOL) setup_lifting} @{syntax thmref} @{syntax thmref}? \<newline> (@'parametric' @{syntax thmref})? \<close>} @{rail \<open> @@{command (HOL) lift_definition} ('(' 'code_dt' ')')? @{syntax name} '::' @{syntax type} \<newline> @{syntax mixfix}? 'is' @{syntax term} (@'parametric' (@{syntax thmref}+))? \<close>} @{rail \<open> @@{command (HOL) lifting_forget} @{syntax nameref} \<close>} @{rail \<open> @@{command (HOL) lifting_update} @{syntax nameref} \<close>} @{rail \<open> @@{attribute (HOL) lifting_restore} @{syntax thmref} (@{syntax thmref} @{syntax thmref})? \<close>} \begin{description} \item @{command (HOL) "setup_lifting"} Sets up the Lifting package to work with a user-defined type. The command supports two modes. The first one is a low-level mode when the user must provide as a first argument of @{command (HOL) "setup_lifting"} a quotient theorem @{term "Quotient R Abs Rep T"}. The package configures a transfer rule for equality, a domain transfer rules and sets up the @{command_def (HOL) "lift_definition"} command to work with the abstract type. An optional theorem @{term "reflp R"}, which certifies that the equivalence relation R is total, can be provided as a second argument. This allows the package to generate stronger transfer rules. And finally, the parametricity theorem for R can be provided as a third argument. This allows the package to generate a stronger transfer rule for equality. Users generally will not prove the @{text Quotient} theorem manually for new types, as special commands exist to automate the process. When a new subtype is defined by @{command (HOL) typedef}, @{command (HOL) "lift_definition"} can be used in its second mode, where only the type_definition theorem @{text "type_definition Rep Abs A"} is used as an argument of the command. The command internally proves the corresponding Quotient theorem and registers it with @{command (HOL) setup_lifting} using its first mode. For quotients, the command @{command (HOL) quotient_type} can be used. The command defines a new quotient type and similarly to the previous case, the corresponding Quotient theorem is proved and registered by @{command (HOL) setup_lifting}. The command @{command (HOL) "setup_lifting"} also sets up the code generator for the new type. Later on, when a new constant is defined by @{command (HOL) "lift_definition"}, the Lifting package proves and registers a code equation (if there is one) for the new constant. \item @{command (HOL) "lift_definition"} @{text "f :: \<tau>"} @{keyword (HOL) "is"} @{text t} Defines a new function @{text f} with an abstract type @{text \<tau>} in terms of a corresponding operation @{text t} on a representation type. More formally, if @{text "t :: \<sigma>"}, then the command builds a term @{text "F"} as a corresponding combination of abstraction and representation functions such that @{text "F :: \<sigma> \<Rightarrow> \<tau>" } and defines @{text f} is as @{text "f \<equiv> F t"}. The term @{text t} does not have to be necessarily a constant but it can be any term. The command opens a proof environment and the user must discharge a respectfulness proof obligation. For a type copy, i.e., a typedef with @{text UNIV}, the obligation is discharged automatically. The proof goal is presented in a user-friendly, readable form. A respectfulness theorem in the standard format @{text f.rsp} and a transfer rule @{text f.transfer} for the Transfer package are generated by the package. The user can specify a parametricity theorems for @{text t} after the keyword @{keyword "parametric"}, which allows the command to generate parametric transfer rules for @{text f}. For each constant defined through trivial quotients (type copies or subtypes) @{text f.rep_eq} is generated. The equation is a code certificate that defines @{text f} using the representation function. For each constant @{text f.abs_eq} is generated. The equation is unconditional for total quotients. The equation defines @{text f} using the abstraction function. Integration with [@{attribute code} abstract]: For subtypes (e.g., corresponding to a datatype invariant, such as @{typ "'a dlist"}), @{command (HOL) "lift_definition"} uses a code certificate theorem @{text f.rep_eq} as a code equation. Because of the limitation of the code generator, @{text f.rep_eq} cannot be used as a code equation if the subtype occurs inside the result type rather than at the top level (e.g., function returning @{typ "'a dlist option"} vs. @{typ "'a dlist"}). In this case, an extension of @{command (HOL) "lift_definition"} can be invoked by specifying the flag @{text "code_dt"}. This extension enables code execution through series of internal type and lifting definitions if the return type @{text "\<tau>"} meets the following inductive conditions: \begin{description} \item @{text "\<tau>"} is a type variable \item @{text "\<tau> = \<tau>\<^sub>1 \<dots> \<tau>\<^sub>n \<kappa>"}, where @{text "\<kappa>"} is an abstract type constructor and @{text "\<tau>\<^sub>1 \<dots> \<tau>\<^sub>n"} do not contain abstract types (i.e., @{typ "int dlist"} is allowed whereas @{typ "int dlist dlist"} not) \item @{text "\<tau> = \<tau>\<^sub>1 \<dots> \<tau>\<^sub>n \<kappa>"}, @{text "\<kappa>"} is a type constructor that was defined as a (co)datatype whose constructor argument types do not contain either non-free datatypes or the function type. \end{description} Integration with [@{attribute code} equation]: For total quotients, @{command (HOL) "lift_definition"} uses @{text f.abs_eq} as a code equation. \item @{command (HOL) lifting_forget} and @{command (HOL) lifting_update} These two commands serve for storing and deleting the set-up of the Lifting package and corresponding transfer rules defined by this package. This is useful for hiding of type construction details of an abstract type when the construction is finished but it still allows additions to this construction when this is later necessary. Whenever the Lifting package is set up with a new abstract type @{text "\<tau>"} by @{command_def (HOL) "lift_definition"}, the package defines a new bundle that is called @{text "\<tau>.lifting"}. This bundle already includes set-up for the Lifting package. The new transfer rules introduced by @{command (HOL) "lift_definition"} can be stored in the bundle by the command @{command (HOL) "lifting_update"} @{text "\<tau>.lifting"}. The command @{command (HOL) "lifting_forget"} @{text "\<tau>.lifting"} deletes set-up of the Lifting package for @{text \<tau>} and deletes all the transfer rules that were introduced by @{command (HOL) "lift_definition"} using @{text \<tau>} as an abstract type. The stored set-up in a bundle can be reintroduced by the Isar commands for including a bundle (@{command "include"}, @{keyword "includes"} and @{command "including"}). \item @{command (HOL) "print_quot_maps"} prints stored quotient map theorems. \item @{command (HOL) "print_quotients"} prints stored quotient theorems. \item @{attribute (HOL) quot_map} registers a quotient map theorem, a theorem showing how to "lift" quotients over type constructors. E.g., @{term "Quotient R Abs Rep T \<Longrightarrow> Quotient (rel_set R) (image Abs) (image Rep) (rel_set T)"}. For examples see @{file "~~/src/HOL/Lifting_Set.thy"} or @{file "~~/src/HOL/Lifting.thy"}. This property is proved automatically if the involved type is BNF without dead variables. \item @{attribute (HOL) relator_eq_onp} registers a theorem that shows that a relator applied to an equality restricted by a predicate @{term P} (i.e., @{term "eq_onp P"}) is equal to a predicator applied to the @{term P}. The combinator @{const eq_onp} is used for internal encoding of proper subtypes. Such theorems allows the package to hide @{text eq_onp} from a user in a user-readable form of a respectfulness theorem. For examples see @{file "~~/src/HOL/Lifting_Set.thy"} or @{file "~~/src/HOL/Lifting.thy"}. This property is proved automatically if the involved type is BNF without dead variables. \item @{attribute (HOL) "relator_mono"} registers a property describing a monotonicity of a relator. E.g., @{term "A \<le> B \<Longrightarrow> rel_set A \<le> rel_set B"}. This property is needed for proving a stronger transfer rule in @{command_def (HOL) "lift_definition"} when a parametricity theorem for the raw term is specified and also for the reflexivity prover. For examples see @{file "~~/src/HOL/Lifting_Set.thy"} or @{file "~~/src/HOL/Lifting.thy"}. This property is proved automatically if the involved type is BNF without dead variables. \item @{attribute (HOL) "relator_distr"} registers a property describing a distributivity of the relation composition and a relator. E.g., @{text "rel_set R \<circ>\<circ> rel_set S = rel_set (R \<circ>\<circ> S)"}. This property is needed for proving a stronger transfer rule in @{command_def (HOL) "lift_definition"} when a parametricity theorem for the raw term is specified. When this equality does not hold unconditionally (e.g., for the function type), the user can specified each direction separately and also register multiple theorems with different set of assumptions. This attribute can be used only after the monotonicity property was already registered by @{attribute (HOL) "relator_mono"}. For examples see @{file "~~/src/HOL/Lifting_Set.thy"} or @{file "~~/src/HOL/Lifting.thy"}. This property is proved automatically if the involved type is BNF without dead variables. \item @{attribute (HOL) quot_del} deletes a corresponding Quotient theorem from the Lifting infrastructure and thus de-register the corresponding quotient. This effectively causes that @{command (HOL) lift_definition} will not do any lifting for the corresponding type. This attribute is rather used for low-level manipulation with set-up of the Lifting package because @{command (HOL) lifting_forget} is preferred for normal usage. \item @{attribute (HOL) lifting_restore} @{text "Quotient_thm pcr_def pcr_cr_eq_thm"} registers the Quotient theorem @{text Quotient_thm} in the Lifting infrastructure and thus sets up lifting for an abstract type @{text \<tau>} (that is defined by @{text Quotient_thm}). Optional theorems @{text pcr_def} and @{text pcr_cr_eq_thm} can be specified to register the parametrized correspondence relation for @{text \<tau>}. E.g., for @{typ "'a dlist"}, @{text pcr_def} is @{text "pcr_dlist A \<equiv> list_all2 A \<circ>\<circ> cr_dlist"} and @{text pcr_cr_eq_thm} is @{text "pcr_dlist op= = op="}. This attribute is rather used for low-level manipulation with set-up of the Lifting package because using of the bundle @{text \<tau>.lifting} together with the commands @{command (HOL) lifting_forget} and @{command (HOL) lifting_update} is preferred for normal usage. \item Integration with the BNF package @{cite "isabelle-datatypes"}: As already mentioned, the theorems that are registered by the following attributes are proved and registered automatically if the involved type is BNF without dead variables: @{attribute (HOL) quot_map}, @{attribute (HOL) relator_eq_onp}, @{attribute (HOL) "relator_mono"}, @{attribute (HOL) "relator_distr"}. Also the definition of a relator and predicator is provided automatically. Moreover, if the BNF represents a datatype, simplification rules for a predicator are again proved automatically. \end{description} \<close> section \<open>Coercive subtyping\<close> text \<open> \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{attribute_def (HOL) coercion} & : & @{text attribute} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) coercion_enabled} & : & @{text attribute} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) coercion_map} & : & @{text attribute} \\ \end{matharray} Coercive subtyping allows the user to omit explicit type conversions, also called \emph{coercions}. Type inference will add them as necessary when parsing a term. See @{cite "traytel-berghofer-nipkow-2011"} for details. @{rail \<open> @@{attribute (HOL) coercion} (@{syntax term})? ; @@{attribute (HOL) coercion_map} (@{syntax term})? \<close>} \begin{description} \item @{attribute (HOL) "coercion"}~@{text "f"} registers a new coercion function @{text "f :: \<sigma>\<^sub>1 \<Rightarrow> \<sigma>\<^sub>2"} where @{text "\<sigma>\<^sub>1"} and @{text "\<sigma>\<^sub>2"} are type constructors without arguments. Coercions are composed by the inference algorithm if needed. Note that the type inference algorithm is complete only if the registered coercions form a lattice. \item @{attribute (HOL) "coercion_map"}~@{text "map"} registers a new map function to lift coercions through type constructors. The function @{text "map"} must conform to the following type pattern \begin{matharray}{lll} @{text "map"} & @{text "::"} & @{text "f\<^sub>1 \<Rightarrow> \<dots> \<Rightarrow> f\<^sub>n \<Rightarrow> (\<alpha>\<^sub>1, \<dots>, \<alpha>\<^sub>n) t \<Rightarrow> (\<beta>\<^sub>1, \<dots>, \<beta>\<^sub>n) t"} \\ \end{matharray} where @{text "t"} is a type constructor and @{text "f\<^sub>i"} is of type @{text "\<alpha>\<^sub>i \<Rightarrow> \<beta>\<^sub>i"} or @{text "\<beta>\<^sub>i \<Rightarrow> \<alpha>\<^sub>i"}. Registering a map function overwrites any existing map function for this particular type constructor. \item @{attribute (HOL) "coercion_enabled"} enables the coercion inference algorithm. \end{description} \<close> section \<open>Arithmetic proof support\<close> text \<open> \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{method_def (HOL) arith} & : & @{text method} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) arith} & : & @{text attribute} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) arith_split} & : & @{text attribute} \\ \end{matharray} \begin{description} \item @{method (HOL) arith} decides linear arithmetic problems (on types @{text nat}, @{text int}, @{text real}). Any current facts are inserted into the goal before running the procedure. \item @{attribute (HOL) arith} declares facts that are supplied to the arithmetic provers implicitly. \item @{attribute (HOL) arith_split} attribute declares case split rules to be expanded before @{method (HOL) arith} is invoked. \end{description} Note that a simpler (but faster) arithmetic prover is already invoked by the Simplifier. \<close> section \<open>Intuitionistic proof search\<close> text \<open> \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{method_def (HOL) iprover} & : & @{text method} \\ \end{matharray} @{rail \<open> @@{method (HOL) iprover} (@{syntax rulemod} *) \<close>} \begin{description} \item @{method (HOL) iprover} performs intuitionistic proof search, depending on specifically declared rules from the context, or given as explicit arguments. Chained facts are inserted into the goal before commencing proof search. Rules need to be classified as @{attribute (Pure) intro}, @{attribute (Pure) elim}, or @{attribute (Pure) dest}; here the ``@{text "!"}'' indicator refers to ``safe'' rules, which may be applied aggressively (without considering back-tracking later). Rules declared with ``@{text "?"}'' are ignored in proof search (the single-step @{method (Pure) rule} method still observes these). An explicit weight annotation may be given as well; otherwise the number of rule premises will be taken into account here. \end{description} \<close> section \<open>Model Elimination and Resolution\<close> text \<open> \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{method_def (HOL) "meson"} & : & @{text method} \\ @{method_def (HOL) "metis"} & : & @{text method} \\ \end{matharray} @{rail \<open> @@{method (HOL) meson} @{syntax thmrefs}? ; @@{method (HOL) metis} ('(' ('partial_types' | 'full_types' | 'no_types' | @{syntax name}) ')')? @{syntax thmrefs}? \<close>} \begin{description} \item @{method (HOL) meson} implements Loveland's model elimination procedure @{cite "loveland-78"}. See @{file "~~/src/HOL/ex/Meson_Test.thy"} for examples. \item @{method (HOL) metis} combines ordered resolution and ordered paramodulation to find first-order (or mildly higher-order) proofs. The first optional argument specifies a type encoding; see the Sledgehammer manual @{cite "isabelle-sledgehammer"} for details. The directory @{file "~~/src/HOL/Metis_Examples"} contains several small theories developed to a large extent using @{method (HOL) metis}. \end{description} \<close> section \<open>Algebraic reasoning via Gr\"obner bases\<close> text \<open> \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{method_def (HOL) "algebra"} & : & @{text method} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) algebra} & : & @{text attribute} \\ \end{matharray} @{rail \<open> @@{method (HOL) algebra} ('add' ':' @{syntax thmrefs})? ('del' ':' @{syntax thmrefs})? ; @@{attribute (HOL) algebra} (() | 'add' | 'del') \<close>} \begin{description} \item @{method (HOL) algebra} performs algebraic reasoning via Gr\"obner bases, see also @{cite "Chaieb-Wenzel:2007"} and @{cite \<open>\S3.2\<close> "Chaieb-thesis"}. The method handles deals with two main classes of problems: \begin{enumerate} \item Universal problems over multivariate polynomials in a (semi)-ring/field/idom; the capabilities of the method are augmented according to properties of these structures. For this problem class the method is only complete for algebraically closed fields, since the underlying method is based on Hilbert's Nullstellensatz, where the equivalence only holds for algebraically closed fields. The problems can contain equations @{text "p = 0"} or inequations @{text "q \<noteq> 0"} anywhere within a universal problem statement. \item All-exists problems of the following restricted (but useful) form: @{text [display] "\<forall>x\<^sub>1 \<dots> x\<^sub>n. e\<^sub>1(x\<^sub>1, \<dots>, x\<^sub>n) = 0 \<and> \<dots> \<and> e\<^sub>m(x\<^sub>1, \<dots>, x\<^sub>n) = 0 \<longrightarrow> (\<exists>y\<^sub>1 \<dots> y\<^sub>k. p\<^sub>1\<^sub>1(x\<^sub>1, \<dots> ,x\<^sub>n) * y\<^sub>1 + \<dots> + p\<^sub>1\<^sub>k(x\<^sub>1, \<dots>, x\<^sub>n) * y\<^sub>k = 0 \<and> \<dots> \<and> p\<^sub>t\<^sub>1(x\<^sub>1, \<dots>, x\<^sub>n) * y\<^sub>1 + \<dots> + p\<^sub>t\<^sub>k(x\<^sub>1, \<dots>, x\<^sub>n) * y\<^sub>k = 0)"} Here @{text "e\<^sub>1, \<dots>, e\<^sub>n"} and the @{text "p\<^sub>i\<^sub>j"} are multivariate polynomials only in the variables mentioned as arguments. \end{enumerate} The proof method is preceded by a simplification step, which may be modified by using the form @{text "(algebra add: ths\<^sub>1 del: ths\<^sub>2)"}. This acts like declarations for the Simplifier (\secref{sec:simplifier}) on a private simpset for this tool. \item @{attribute algebra} (as attribute) manages the default collection of pre-simplification rules of the above proof method. \end{description} \<close> subsubsection \<open>Example\<close> text \<open>The subsequent example is from geometry: collinearity is invariant by rotation.\<close> (*<*)experiment begin(*>*) type_synonym point = "int \<times> int" fun collinear :: "point \<Rightarrow> point \<Rightarrow> point \<Rightarrow> bool" where "collinear (Ax, Ay) (Bx, By) (Cx, Cy) \<longleftrightarrow> (Ax - Bx) * (By - Cy) = (Ay - By) * (Bx - Cx)" lemma collinear_inv_rotation: assumes "collinear (Ax, Ay) (Bx, By) (Cx, Cy)" and "c\<^sup>2 + s\<^sup>2 = 1" shows "collinear (Ax * c - Ay * s, Ay * c + Ax * s) (Bx * c - By * s, By * c + Bx * s) (Cx * c - Cy * s, Cy * c + Cx * s)" using assms by (algebra add: collinear.simps) (*<*)end(*>*) text \<open> See also @{file "~~/src/HOL/ex/Groebner_Examples.thy"}. \<close> section \<open>Coherent Logic\<close> text \<open> \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{method_def (HOL) "coherent"} & : & @{text method} \\ \end{matharray} @{rail \<open> @@{method (HOL) coherent} @{syntax thmrefs}? \<close>} \begin{description} \item @{method (HOL) coherent} solves problems of \emph{Coherent Logic} @{cite "Bezem-Coquand:2005"}, which covers applications in confluence theory, lattice theory and projective geometry. See @{file "~~/src/HOL/ex/Coherent.thy"} for some examples. \end{description} \<close> section \<open>Proving propositions\<close> text \<open> In addition to the standard proof methods, a number of diagnosis tools search for proofs and provide an Isar proof snippet on success. These tools are available via the following commands. \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{command_def (HOL) "solve_direct"}@{text "\<^sup>*"} & : & @{text "proof \<rightarrow>"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "try"}@{text "\<^sup>*"} & : & @{text "proof \<rightarrow>"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "try0"}@{text "\<^sup>*"} & : & @{text "proof \<rightarrow>"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "sledgehammer"}@{text "\<^sup>*"} & : & @{text "proof \<rightarrow>"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "sledgehammer_params"} & : & @{text "theory \<rightarrow> theory"} \end{matharray} @{rail \<open> @@{command (HOL) try} ; @@{command (HOL) try0} ( ( ( 'simp' | 'intro' | 'elim' | 'dest' ) ':' @{syntax thmrefs} ) + ) ? @{syntax nat}? ; @@{command (HOL) sledgehammer} ( '[' args ']' )? facts? @{syntax nat}? ; @@{command (HOL) sledgehammer_params} ( ( '[' args ']' ) ? ) ; args: ( @{syntax name} '=' value + ',' ) ; facts: '(' ( ( ( ( 'add' | 'del' ) ':' ) ? @{syntax thmrefs} ) + ) ? ')' \<close>} % FIXME check args "value" \begin{description} \item @{command (HOL) "solve_direct"} checks whether the current subgoals can be solved directly by an existing theorem. Duplicate lemmas can be detected in this way. \item @{command (HOL) "try0"} attempts to prove a subgoal using a combination of standard proof methods (@{method auto}, @{method simp}, @{method blast}, etc.). Additional facts supplied via @{text "simp:"}, @{text "intro:"}, @{text "elim:"}, and @{text "dest:"} are passed to the appropriate proof methods. \item @{command (HOL) "try"} attempts to prove or disprove a subgoal using a combination of provers and disprovers (@{command (HOL) "solve_direct"}, @{command (HOL) "quickcheck"}, @{command (HOL) "try0"}, @{command (HOL) "sledgehammer"}, @{command (HOL) "nitpick"}). \item @{command (HOL) "sledgehammer"} attempts to prove a subgoal using external automatic provers (resolution provers and SMT solvers). See the Sledgehammer manual @{cite "isabelle-sledgehammer"} for details. \item @{command (HOL) "sledgehammer_params"} changes @{command (HOL) "sledgehammer"} configuration options persistently. \end{description} \<close> section \<open>Checking and refuting propositions\<close> text \<open> Identifying incorrect propositions usually involves evaluation of particular assignments and systematic counterexample search. This is supported by the following commands. \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{command_def (HOL) "value"}@{text "\<^sup>*"} & : & @{text "context \<rightarrow>"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "values"}@{text "\<^sup>*"} & : & @{text "context \<rightarrow>"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "quickcheck"}@{text "\<^sup>*"} & : & @{text "proof \<rightarrow>"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "nitpick"}@{text "\<^sup>*"} & : & @{text "proof \<rightarrow>"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "quickcheck_params"} & : & @{text "theory \<rightarrow> theory"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "nitpick_params"} & : & @{text "theory \<rightarrow> theory"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "quickcheck_generator"} & : & @{text "theory \<rightarrow> theory"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "find_unused_assms"} & : & @{text "context \<rightarrow>"} \end{matharray} @{rail \<open> @@{command (HOL) value} ( '[' @{syntax name} ']' )? modes? @{syntax term} ; @@{command (HOL) values} modes? @{syntax nat}? @{syntax term} ; (@@{command (HOL) quickcheck} | @@{command (HOL) nitpick}) ( '[' args ']' )? @{syntax nat}? ; (@@{command (HOL) quickcheck_params} | @@{command (HOL) nitpick_params}) ( '[' args ']' )? ; @@{command (HOL) quickcheck_generator} @{syntax nameref} \<newline> 'operations:' ( @{syntax term} +) ; @@{command (HOL) find_unused_assms} @{syntax name}? ; modes: '(' (@{syntax name} +) ')' ; args: ( @{syntax name} '=' value + ',' ) \<close>} % FIXME check "value" \begin{description} \item @{command (HOL) "value"}~@{text t} evaluates and prints a term; optionally @{text modes} can be specified, which are appended to the current print mode; see \secref{sec:print-modes}. Evaluation is tried first using ML, falling back to normalization by evaluation if this fails. Alternatively a specific evaluator can be selected using square brackets; typical evaluators use the current set of code equations to normalize and include @{text simp} for fully symbolic evaluation using the simplifier, @{text nbe} for \emph{normalization by evaluation} and \emph{code} for code generation in SML. \item @{command (HOL) "values"}~@{text t} enumerates a set comprehension by evaluation and prints its values up to the given number of solutions; optionally @{text modes} can be specified, which are appended to the current print mode; see \secref{sec:print-modes}. \item @{command (HOL) "quickcheck"} tests the current goal for counterexamples using a series of assignments for its free variables; by default the first subgoal is tested, an other can be selected explicitly using an optional goal index. Assignments can be chosen exhausting the search space up to a given size, or using a fixed number of random assignments in the search space, or exploring the search space symbolically using narrowing. By default, quickcheck uses exhaustive testing. A number of configuration options are supported for @{command (HOL) "quickcheck"}, notably: \begin{description} \item[@{text tester}] specifies which testing approach to apply. There are three testers, @{text exhaustive}, @{text random}, and @{text narrowing}. An unknown configuration option is treated as an argument to tester, making @{text "tester ="} optional. When multiple testers are given, these are applied in parallel. If no tester is specified, quickcheck uses the testers that are set active, i.e., configurations @{attribute quickcheck_exhaustive_active}, @{attribute quickcheck_random_active}, @{attribute quickcheck_narrowing_active} are set to true. \item[@{text size}] specifies the maximum size of the search space for assignment values. \item[@{text genuine_only}] sets quickcheck only to return genuine counterexample, but not potentially spurious counterexamples due to underspecified functions. \item[@{text abort_potential}] sets quickcheck to abort once it found a potentially spurious counterexample and to not continue to search for a further genuine counterexample. For this option to be effective, the @{text genuine_only} option must be set to false. \item[@{text eval}] takes a term or a list of terms and evaluates these terms under the variable assignment found by quickcheck. This option is currently only supported by the default (exhaustive) tester. \item[@{text iterations}] sets how many sets of assignments are generated for each particular size. \item[@{text no_assms}] specifies whether assumptions in structured proofs should be ignored. \item[@{text locale}] specifies how to process conjectures in a locale context, i.e., they can be interpreted or expanded. The option is a whitespace-separated list of the two words @{text interpret} and @{text expand}. The list determines the order they are employed. The default setting is to first use interpretations and then test the expanded conjecture. The option is only provided as attribute declaration, but not as parameter to the command. \item[@{text timeout}] sets the time limit in seconds. \item[@{text default_type}] sets the type(s) generally used to instantiate type variables. \item[@{text report}] if set quickcheck reports how many tests fulfilled the preconditions. \item[@{text use_subtype}] if set quickcheck automatically lifts conjectures to registered subtypes if possible, and tests the lifted conjecture. \item[@{text quiet}] if set quickcheck does not output anything while testing. \item[@{text verbose}] if set quickcheck informs about the current size and cardinality while testing. \item[@{text expect}] can be used to check if the user's expectation was met (@{text no_expectation}, @{text no_counterexample}, or @{text counterexample}). \end{description} These option can be given within square brackets. Using the following type classes, the testers generate values and convert them back into Isabelle terms for displaying counterexamples. \begin{description} \item[@{text exhaustive}] The parameters of the type classes @{class exhaustive} and @{class full_exhaustive} implement the testing. They take a testing function as a parameter, which takes a value of type @{typ "'a"} and optionally produces a counterexample, and a size parameter for the test values. In @{class full_exhaustive}, the testing function parameter additionally expects a lazy term reconstruction in the type @{typ Code_Evaluation.term} of the tested value. The canonical implementation for @{text exhaustive} testers calls the given testing function on all values up to the given size and stops as soon as a counterexample is found. \item[@{text random}] The operation @{const Quickcheck_Random.random} of the type class @{class random} generates a pseudo-random value of the given size and a lazy term reconstruction of the value in the type @{typ Code_Evaluation.term}. A pseudo-randomness generator is defined in theory @{theory Random}. \item[@{text narrowing}] implements Haskell's Lazy Smallcheck @{cite "runciman-naylor-lindblad"} using the type classes @{class narrowing} and @{class partial_term_of}. Variables in the current goal are initially represented as symbolic variables. If the execution of the goal tries to evaluate one of them, the test engine replaces it with refinements provided by @{const narrowing}. Narrowing views every value as a sum-of-products which is expressed using the operations @{const Quickcheck_Narrowing.cons} (embedding a value), @{const Quickcheck_Narrowing.apply} (product) and @{const Quickcheck_Narrowing.sum} (sum). The refinement should enable further evaluation of the goal. For example, @{const narrowing} for the list type @{typ "'a :: narrowing list"} can be recursively defined as @{term "Quickcheck_Narrowing.sum (Quickcheck_Narrowing.cons []) (Quickcheck_Narrowing.apply (Quickcheck_Narrowing.apply (Quickcheck_Narrowing.cons (op #)) narrowing) narrowing)"}. If a symbolic variable of type @{typ "_ list"} is evaluated, it is replaced by (i)~the empty list @{term "[]"} and (ii)~by a non-empty list whose head and tail can then be recursively refined if needed. To reconstruct counterexamples, the operation @{const partial_term_of} transforms @{text narrowing}'s deep representation of terms to the type @{typ Code_Evaluation.term}. The deep representation models symbolic variables as @{const Quickcheck_Narrowing.Narrowing_variable}, which are normally converted to @{const Code_Evaluation.Free}, and refined values as @{term "Quickcheck_Narrowing.Narrowing_constructor i args"}, where @{term "i :: integer"} denotes the index in the sum of refinements. In the above example for lists, @{term "0"} corresponds to @{term "[]"} and @{term "1"} to @{term "op #"}. The command @{command (HOL) "code_datatype"} sets up @{const partial_term_of} such that the @{term "i"}-th refinement is interpreted as the @{term "i"}-th constructor, but it does not ensures consistency with @{const narrowing}. \end{description} \item @{command (HOL) "quickcheck_params"} changes @{command (HOL) "quickcheck"} configuration options persistently. \item @{command (HOL) "quickcheck_generator"} creates random and exhaustive value generators for a given type and operations. It generates values by using the operations as if they were constructors of that type. \item @{command (HOL) "nitpick"} tests the current goal for counterexamples using a reduction to first-order relational logic. See the Nitpick manual @{cite "isabelle-nitpick"} for details. \item @{command (HOL) "nitpick_params"} changes @{command (HOL) "nitpick"} configuration options persistently. \item @{command (HOL) "find_unused_assms"} finds potentially superfluous assumptions in theorems using quickcheck. It takes the theory name to be checked for superfluous assumptions as optional argument. If not provided, it checks the current theory. Options to the internal quickcheck invocations can be changed with common configuration declarations. \end{description} \<close> section \<open>Unstructured case analysis and induction \label{sec:hol-induct-tac}\<close> text \<open> The following tools of Isabelle/HOL support cases analysis and induction in unstructured tactic scripts; see also \secref{sec:cases-induct} for proper Isar versions of similar ideas. \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{method_def (HOL) case_tac}@{text "\<^sup>*"} & : & @{text method} \\ @{method_def (HOL) induct_tac}@{text "\<^sup>*"} & : & @{text method} \\ @{method_def (HOL) ind_cases}@{text "\<^sup>*"} & : & @{text method} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "inductive_cases"}@{text "\<^sup>*"} & : & @{text "local_theory \<rightarrow> local_theory"} \\ \end{matharray} @{rail \<open> @@{method (HOL) case_tac} @{syntax goal_spec}? @{syntax term} rule? ; @@{method (HOL) induct_tac} @{syntax goal_spec}? (@{syntax insts} * @'and') rule? ; @@{method (HOL) ind_cases} (@{syntax prop}+) @{syntax for_fixes} ; @@{command (HOL) inductive_cases} (@{syntax thmdecl}? (@{syntax prop}+) + @'and') ; rule: 'rule' ':' @{syntax thmref} \<close>} \begin{description} \item @{method (HOL) case_tac} and @{method (HOL) induct_tac} admit to reason about inductive types. Rules are selected according to the declarations by the @{attribute cases} and @{attribute induct} attributes, cf.\ \secref{sec:cases-induct}. The @{command (HOL) datatype} package already takes care of this. These unstructured tactics feature both goal addressing and dynamic instantiation. Note that named rule cases are \emph{not} provided as would be by the proper @{method cases} and @{method induct} proof methods (see \secref{sec:cases-induct}). Unlike the @{method induct} method, @{method induct_tac} does not handle structured rule statements, only the compact object-logic conclusion of the subgoal being addressed. \item @{method (HOL) ind_cases} and @{command (HOL) "inductive_cases"} provide an interface to the internal @{ML_text mk_cases} operation. Rules are simplified in an unrestricted forward manner. While @{method (HOL) ind_cases} is a proof method to apply the result immediately as elimination rules, @{command (HOL) "inductive_cases"} provides case split theorems at the theory level for later use. The @{keyword "for"} argument of the @{method (HOL) ind_cases} method allows to specify a list of variables that should be generalized before applying the resulting rule. \end{description} \<close> chapter \<open>Executable code\<close> text \<open>For validation purposes, it is often useful to \emph{execute} specifications. In principle, execution could be simulated by Isabelle's inference kernel, i.e. by a combination of resolution and simplification. Unfortunately, this approach is rather inefficient. A more efficient way of executing specifications is to translate them into a functional programming language such as ML. Isabelle provides a generic framework to support code generation from executable specifications. Isabelle/HOL instantiates these mechanisms in a way that is amenable to end-user applications. Code can be generated for functional programs (including overloading using type classes) targeting SML @{cite SML}, OCaml @{cite OCaml}, Haskell @{cite "haskell-revised-report"} and Scala @{cite "scala-overview-tech-report"}. Conceptually, code generation is split up in three steps: \emph{selection} of code theorems, \emph{translation} into an abstract executable view and \emph{serialization} to a specific \emph{target language}. Inductive specifications can be executed using the predicate compiler which operates within HOL. See @{cite "isabelle-codegen"} for an introduction. \begin{matharray}{rcl} @{command_def (HOL) "export_code"}@{text "\<^sup>*"} & : & @{text "context \<rightarrow>"} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) code} & : & @{text attribute} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "code_datatype"} & : & @{text "theory \<rightarrow> theory"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "print_codesetup"}@{text "\<^sup>*"} & : & @{text "context \<rightarrow>"} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) code_unfold} & : & @{text attribute} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) code_post} & : & @{text attribute} \\ @{attribute_def (HOL) code_abbrev} & : & @{text attribute} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "print_codeproc"}@{text "\<^sup>*"} & : & @{text "context \<rightarrow>"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "code_thms"}@{text "\<^sup>*"} & : & @{text "context \<rightarrow>"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "code_deps"}@{text "\<^sup>*"} & : & @{text "context \<rightarrow>"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "code_reserved"} & : & @{text "theory \<rightarrow> theory"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "code_printing"} & : & @{text "theory \<rightarrow> theory"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "code_identifier"} & : & @{text "theory \<rightarrow> theory"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "code_monad"} & : & @{text "theory \<rightarrow> theory"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "code_reflect"} & : & @{text "theory \<rightarrow> theory"} \\ @{command_def (HOL) "code_pred"} & : & @{text "theory \<rightarrow> proof(prove)"} \end{matharray} @{rail \<open> @@{command (HOL) export_code} ( @'open' ) ? ( constexpr + ) \<newline> ( ( @'in' target ( @'module_name' @{syntax string} ) ? \<newline> ( @'file' @{syntax string} ) ? ( '(' args ')' ) ?) + ) ? ; const: @{syntax term} ; constexpr: ( const | 'name._' | '_' ) ; typeconstructor: @{syntax nameref} ; class: @{syntax nameref} ; target: 'SML' | 'OCaml' | 'Haskell' | 'Scala' | 'Eval' ; @@{attribute (HOL) code} ( 'del' | 'equation' | 'abstype' | 'abstract' | 'drop:' ( const + ) | 'abort:' ( const + ) )? ; @@{command (HOL) code_datatype} ( const + ) ; @@{attribute (HOL) code_unfold} ( 'del' ) ? ; @@{attribute (HOL) code_post} ( 'del' ) ? ; @@{attribute (HOL) code_abbrev} ; @@{command (HOL) code_thms} ( constexpr + ) ? ; @@{command (HOL) code_deps} ( constexpr + ) ? ; @@{command (HOL) code_reserved} target ( @{syntax string} + ) ; symbol_const: ( @'constant' const ) ; symbol_typeconstructor: ( @'type_constructor' typeconstructor ) ; symbol_class: ( @'type_class' class ) ; symbol_class_relation: ( @'class_relation' class ( '<' | '\<subseteq>' ) class ) ; symbol_class_instance: ( @'class_instance' typeconstructor @'::' class ) ; symbol_module: ( @'code_module' name ) ; syntax: @{syntax string} | ( @'infix' | @'infixl' | @'infixr' ) @{syntax nat} @{syntax string} ; printing_const: symbol_const ( '\<rightharpoonup>' | '=>' ) \<newline> ( '(' target ')' syntax ? + @'and' ) ; printing_typeconstructor: symbol_typeconstructor ( '\<rightharpoonup>' | '=>' ) \<newline> ( '(' target ')' syntax ? + @'and' ) ; printing_class: symbol_class ( '\<rightharpoonup>' | '=>' ) \<newline> ( '(' target ')' @{syntax string} ? + @'and' ) ; printing_class_relation: symbol_class_relation ( '\<rightharpoonup>' | '=>' ) \<newline> ( '(' target ')' @{syntax string} ? + @'and' ) ; printing_class_instance: symbol_class_instance ( '\<rightharpoonup>' | '=>' ) \<newline> ( '(' target ')' '-' ? + @'and' ) ; printing_module: symbol_module ( '\<rightharpoonup>' | '=>' ) \<newline> ( '(' target ')' ( @{syntax string} ( @'attach' ( const + ) ) ? ) ? + @'and' ) ; @@{command (HOL) code_printing} ( ( printing_const | printing_typeconstructor | printing_class | printing_class_relation | printing_class_instance | printing_module ) + '|' ) ; @@{command (HOL) code_identifier} ( ( symbol_const | symbol_typeconstructor | symbol_class | symbol_class_relation | symbol_class_instance | symbol_module ) ( '\<rightharpoonup>' | '=>' ) \<newline> ( '(' target ')' @{syntax string} ? + @'and' ) + '|' ) ; @@{command (HOL) code_monad} const const target ; @@{command (HOL) code_reflect} @{syntax string} \<newline> ( @'datatypes' ( @{syntax string} '=' ( '_' | ( @{syntax string} + '|' ) + @'and' ) ) ) ? \<newline> ( @'functions' ( @{syntax string} + ) ) ? ( @'file' @{syntax string} ) ? ; @@{command (HOL) code_pred} \<newline> ('(' @'modes' ':' modedecl ')')? \<newline> const ; modedecl: (modes | ((const ':' modes) \<newline> (@'and' ((const ':' modes @'and') +))?)) ; modes: mode @'as' const \<close>} \begin{description} \item @{command (HOL) "export_code"} generates code for a given list of constants in the specified target language(s). If no serialization instruction is given, only abstract code is generated internally. Constants may be specified by giving them literally, referring to all executable constants within a certain theory by giving @{text "name._"}, or referring to \emph{all} executable constants currently available by giving @{text "_"}. By default, exported identifiers are minimized per module. This can be suppressed by prepending @{keyword "open"} before the list of contants. By default, for each involved theory one corresponding name space module is generated. Alternatively, a module name may be specified after the @{keyword "module_name"} keyword; then \emph{all} code is placed in this module. For \emph{SML}, \emph{OCaml} and \emph{Scala} the file specification refers to a single file; for \emph{Haskell}, it refers to a whole directory, where code is generated in multiple files reflecting the module hierarchy. Omitting the file specification denotes standard output. Serializers take an optional list of arguments in parentheses. For \emph{Haskell} a module name prefix may be given using the ``@{text "root:"}'' argument; ``@{text string_classes}'' adds a ``@{verbatim "deriving (Read, Show)"}'' clause to each appropriate datatype declaration. \item @{attribute (HOL) code} declare code equations for code generation. Variant @{text "code equation"} declares a conventional equation as code equation. Variants @{text "code abstype"} and @{text "code abstract"} declare abstract datatype certificates or code equations on abstract datatype representations respectively. Vanilla @{text "code"} falls back to @{text "code equation"} or @{text "code abstype"} depending on the syntactic shape of the underlying equation. Variant @{text "code del"} deselects a code equation for code generation. Variants @{text "code drop:"} and @{text "code abort:"} take a list of constant as arguments and drop all code equations declared for them. In the case of {text abort}, these constants then are are not required to have a definition by means of code equations; if needed these are implemented by program abort (exception) instead. Usually packages introducing code equations provide a reasonable default setup for selection. \item @{command (HOL) "code_datatype"} specifies a constructor set for a logical type. \item @{command (HOL) "print_codesetup"} gives an overview on selected code equations and code generator datatypes. \item @{attribute (HOL) code_unfold} declares (or with option ``@{text "del"}'' removes) theorems which during preprocessing are applied as rewrite rules to any code equation or evaluation input. \item @{attribute (HOL) code_post} declares (or with option ``@{text "del"}'' removes) theorems which are applied as rewrite rules to any result of an evaluation. \item @{attribute (HOL) code_abbrev} declares (or with option ``@{text "del"}'' removes) equations which are applied as rewrite rules to any result of an evaluation and symmetrically during preprocessing to any code equation or evaluation input. \item @{command (HOL) "print_codeproc"} prints the setup of the code generator preprocessor. \item @{command (HOL) "code_thms"} prints a list of theorems representing the corresponding program containing all given constants after preprocessing. \item @{command (HOL) "code_deps"} visualizes dependencies of theorems representing the corresponding program containing all given constants after preprocessing. \item @{command (HOL) "code_reserved"} declares a list of names as reserved for a given target, preventing it to be shadowed by any generated code. \item @{command (HOL) "code_printing"} associates a series of symbols (constants, type constructors, classes, class relations, instances, module names) with target-specific serializations; omitting a serialization deletes an existing serialization. \item @{command (HOL) "code_monad"} provides an auxiliary mechanism to generate monadic code for Haskell. \item @{command (HOL) "code_identifier"} associates a a series of symbols (constants, type constructors, classes, class relations, instances, module names) with target-specific hints how these symbols shall be named. These hints gain precedence over names for symbols with no hints at all. Conflicting hints are subject to name disambiguation. \emph{Warning:} It is at the discretion of the user to ensure that name prefixes of identifiers in compound statements like type classes or datatypes are still the same. \item @{command (HOL) "code_reflect"} without a ``@{text "file"}'' argument compiles code into the system runtime environment and modifies the code generator setup that future invocations of system runtime code generation referring to one of the ``@{text "datatypes"}'' or ``@{text "functions"}'' entities use these precompiled entities. With a ``@{text "file"}'' argument, the corresponding code is generated into that specified file without modifying the code generator setup. \item @{command (HOL) "code_pred"} creates code equations for a predicate given a set of introduction rules. Optional mode annotations determine which arguments are supposed to be input or output. If alternative introduction rules are declared, one must prove a corresponding elimination rule. \end{description} \<close> end