(* Title: HOL/Library/SCT_Theorem.thy
ID: $Id$
Author: Alexander Krauss, TU Muenchen
*)
header "" (* FIXME proper header *)
theory SCT_Theorem
imports Main Ramsey SCT_Misc SCT_Definition
begin
subsection {* The size change criterion SCT *}
definition is_thread :: "nat \<Rightarrow> nat sequence \<Rightarrow> (nat, scg) ipath \<Rightarrow> bool"
where
"is_thread n \<theta> p = (\<forall>i\<ge>n. eqlat p \<theta> i)"
definition is_fthread ::
"nat sequence \<Rightarrow> (nat, scg) ipath \<Rightarrow> nat \<Rightarrow> nat \<Rightarrow> bool"
where
"is_fthread \<theta> mp i j = (\<forall>k\<in>{i..<j}. eqlat mp \<theta> k)"
definition is_desc_fthread ::
"nat sequence \<Rightarrow> (nat, scg) ipath \<Rightarrow> nat \<Rightarrow> nat \<Rightarrow> bool"
where
"is_desc_fthread \<theta> mp i j =
(is_fthread \<theta> mp i j \<and>
(\<exists>k\<in>{i..<j}. descat mp \<theta> k))"
definition
"has_fth p i j n m =
(\<exists>\<theta>. is_fthread \<theta> p i j \<and> \<theta> i = n \<and> \<theta> j = m)"
definition
"has_desc_fth p i j n m =
(\<exists>\<theta>. is_desc_fthread \<theta> p i j \<and> \<theta> i = n \<and> \<theta> j = m)"
subsection {* Bounded graphs and threads *}
definition
"bounded_scg (P::nat) (G::scg) =
(\<forall>p e p'. has_edge G p e p' \<longrightarrow> p < P \<and> p' < P)"
definition
"bounded_acg P ACG =
(\<forall>n G n'. has_edge ACG n G n' \<longrightarrow> n < P \<and> n' < P \<and> bounded_scg P G)"
definition
"bounded_mp P mp = (\<forall>i. bounded_scg P (snd (mp i)))"
definition (* = finite (range \<theta>) *)
"bounded_th (P::nat) n \<theta> = (\<forall>i>n. \<theta> i < P)"
definition
"finite_scg (G::scg) = (\<exists>P. bounded_scg P G)"
definition
"finite_acg (A::acg) = (\<exists>P. bounded_acg P A)"
lemma "finite (insert x A) = finite A"
by simp
lemma finite_scg_finite[simp]: "finite_scg (Graph G) = finite G"
proof
assume "finite_scg (Graph G)"
thm bounded_scg_def
then obtain P where bounded: "bounded_scg P (Graph G)"
by (auto simp:finite_scg_def)
show "finite G"
proof (rule finite_subset)
from bounded
show "G \<subseteq> {0 .. P - 1} \<times> { LESS, LEQ } \<times> { 0 .. P - 1}"
apply (auto simp:bounded_scg_def has_edge_def)
apply force
apply (case_tac "aa", auto)
apply force
done
show "finite \<dots>"
by (auto intro: finite_cartesian_product finite_atLeastAtMost)
qed
next
assume "finite G"
thus "finite_scg (Graph G)"
proof induct
show "finite_scg (Graph {})"
unfolding finite_scg_def bounded_scg_def has_edge_def by auto
next
fix x G
assume "finite G" "x \<notin> G" "finite_scg (Graph G)"
then obtain P
where bG: "bounded_scg P (Graph G)"
by (auto simp:finite_scg_def)
obtain p e p' where x: "x = (p, e, p')" by (cases x, auto)
let ?Q = "max P (max (Suc p) (Suc p'))"
have "P \<le> ?Q" "Suc p \<le> ?Q" "Suc p' \<le> ?Q" by auto
with bG
have "bounded_scg ?Q (Graph (insert x G))"
unfolding x bounded_scg_def has_edge_def
apply simp
apply (intro allI, elim allE)
by auto
thus "finite_scg (Graph (insert x G))"
by (auto simp:finite_scg_def)
qed
qed
lemma finite_acg_empty:
"finite_acg (Graph {})"
unfolding finite_acg_def bounded_acg_def has_edge_def
by auto
lemma bounded_scg_up: "bounded_scg P G \<Longrightarrow> P \<le> Q \<Longrightarrow> bounded_scg Q G"
unfolding bounded_scg_def
by force
lemma bounded_up: "bounded_acg P G \<Longrightarrow> P \<le> Q \<Longrightarrow> bounded_acg Q G"
unfolding bounded_acg_def
apply auto
apply force+
apply (rule bounded_scg_up)
by auto
lemma bacg_insert:
assumes "bounded_acg P (Graph A)"
assumes "n < P" "m < P" "bounded_scg P G"
shows "bounded_acg P (Graph (insert (n, G, m) A))"
using prems
unfolding bounded_acg_def has_edge_def
by auto
lemma finite_acg_ins:
"finite_acg (Graph (insert (n,G,m) A)) =
(finite_scg G \<and> finite_acg (Graph A))" (is "?A = (?B \<and> ?C)")
proof
assume "?A"
thus "?B \<and> ?C"
unfolding finite_acg_def bounded_acg_def finite_scg_def has_edge_def
by auto
next
assume "?B \<and> ?C"
thus ?A
proof
assume "?B" "?C"
from `?C`
obtain P where bA: "bounded_acg P (Graph A)" by (auto simp:finite_acg_def)
from `?B`
obtain P' where bG: "bounded_scg P' G" by (auto simp:finite_scg_def)
let ?Q = "max (max P P') (max (Suc n) (Suc m))"
have "P \<le> ?Q" "n < ?Q" "m < ?Q" by auto
have "bounded_acg ?Q (Graph (insert (n, G, m) A))"
apply (rule bacg_insert)
apply (rule bounded_up)
apply (rule bA)
apply auto
apply (rule bounded_scg_up)
apply (rule bG)
by auto
thus "finite_acg (Graph (insert (n, G, m) A))"
by (auto simp:finite_acg_def)
qed
qed
lemma bounded_mpath:
assumes "has_ipath acg mp"
and "bounded_acg P acg"
shows "bounded_mp P mp"
using prems
unfolding bounded_acg_def bounded_mp_def has_ipath_def
by blast
lemma bounded_th:
assumes th: "is_thread n \<theta> mp"
and mp: "bounded_mp P mp"
shows "bounded_th P n \<theta>"
unfolding bounded_th_def
proof (intro allI impI)
fix i assume "n < i"
from mp have "bounded_scg P (snd (mp i))" unfolding bounded_mp_def ..
moreover
from th `n < i` have "eqlat mp \<theta> i" unfolding is_thread_def by auto
ultimately
show "\<theta> i < P" unfolding bounded_scg_def by auto
qed
lemma finite_range:
fixes f :: "nat \<Rightarrow> 'a"
assumes fin: "finite (range f)"
shows "\<exists>x. \<exists>\<^sub>\<infinity>i. f i = x"
proof (rule classical)
assume "\<not>(\<exists>x. \<exists>\<^sub>\<infinity>i. f i = x)"
hence "\<forall>x. \<exists>j. \<forall>i>j. f i \<noteq> x"
unfolding INF_nat by blast
with choice
have "\<exists>j. \<forall>x. \<forall>i>(j x). f i \<noteq> x" .
then obtain j where
neq: "\<And>x i. j x < i \<Longrightarrow> f i \<noteq> x" by blast
from fin have "finite (range (j o f))"
by (auto simp:comp_def)
with finite_nat_bounded
obtain m where "range (j o f) \<subseteq> {..<m}" by blast
hence "j (f m) < m" unfolding comp_def by auto
with neq[of "f m" m] show ?thesis by blast
qed
lemma bounded_th_infinite_visit:
fixes \<theta> :: "nat sequence"
assumes b: "bounded_th P n \<theta>"
shows "\<exists>p. \<exists>\<^sub>\<infinity>i. \<theta> i = p"
proof -
have split: "range \<theta> = (\<theta> ` {0 .. n}) \<union> (\<theta> ` {i. n < i})"
(is "\<dots> = ?A \<union> ?B")
unfolding image_Un[symmetric] by auto
have "finite ?A" by (rule finite_imageI) auto
moreover
have "finite ?B"
proof (rule finite_subset)
from b
show "?B \<subseteq> { 0 ..< P }"
unfolding bounded_th_def
by auto
show "finite \<dots>" by auto
qed
ultimately have "finite (range \<theta>)"
unfolding split by auto
with finite_range show ?thesis .
qed
lemma bounded_scgcomp:
"bounded_scg P A
\<Longrightarrow> bounded_scg P B
\<Longrightarrow> bounded_scg P (A * B)"
unfolding bounded_scg_def
by (auto simp:in_grcomp)
lemma bounded_acgcomp:
"bounded_acg P A
\<Longrightarrow> bounded_acg P B
\<Longrightarrow> bounded_acg P (A * B)"
unfolding bounded_acg_def
by (auto simp:in_grcomp intro!:bounded_scgcomp)
lemma bounded_acgpow:
"bounded_acg P A
\<Longrightarrow> bounded_acg P (A ^ (Suc n))"
by (induct n, simp add:power_Suc)
(subst power_Suc, blast intro:bounded_acgcomp)
lemma bounded_plus:
assumes b: "bounded_acg P acg"
shows "bounded_acg P (tcl acg)"
unfolding bounded_acg_def
proof (intro allI impI conjI)
fix n G m
assume "tcl acg \<turnstile> n \<leadsto>\<^bsup>G\<^esup> m"
then obtain i where "0 < i" and i: "acg ^ i \<turnstile> n \<leadsto>\<^bsup>G\<^esup> m"
unfolding in_tcl by auto (* FIXME: Disambiguate \<turnstile> Grammar *)
from b have "bounded_acg P (acg ^ (Suc (i - 1)))"
by (rule bounded_acgpow)
with `0 < i` have "bounded_acg P (acg ^ i)" by simp
with i
show "n < P" "m < P" "bounded_scg P G"
unfolding bounded_acg_def
by auto
qed
lemma bounded_scg_def':
"bounded_scg P G = (\<forall>(p,e,p')\<in>dest_graph G. p < P \<and> p' < P)"
unfolding bounded_scg_def has_edge_def
by auto
lemma finite_bounded_scg: "finite { G. bounded_scg P G }"
proof (rule finite_subset)
show "{G. bounded_scg P G} \<subseteq>
Graph ` (Pow ({0 .. P - 1} \<times> UNIV \<times> {0 .. P - 1}))"
proof (rule, simp)
fix G
assume b: "bounded_scg P G"
show "G \<in> Graph ` Pow ({0..P - Suc 0} \<times> UNIV \<times> {0..P - Suc 0})"
proof (cases G)
fix G' assume [simp]: "G = Graph G'"
from b show ?thesis
by (auto simp:bounded_scg_def' image_def)
qed
qed
show "finite \<dots>"
apply (rule finite_imageI)
apply (unfold finite_Pow_iff)
by (intro finite_cartesian_product finite_atLeastAtMost
finite_class.finite)
qed
lemma bounded_finite:
assumes bounded: "bounded_acg P A"
shows "finite (dest_graph A)"
proof (rule finite_subset)
from bounded
show "dest_graph A \<subseteq> {0 .. P - 1} \<times> { G. bounded_scg P G } \<times> { 0 .. P - 1}"
by (auto simp:bounded_acg_def has_edge_def) force+
show "finite \<dots>"
by (intro finite_cartesian_product finite_atLeastAtMost finite_bounded_scg)
qed
subsection {* Contraction and more *}
abbreviation
"pdesc P == (fst P, prod P, end_node P)"
lemma pdesc_acgplus:
assumes "has_ipath \<A> p"
and "i < j"
shows "has_edge (tcl \<A>) (fst (p\<langle>i,j\<rangle>)) (prod (p\<langle>i,j\<rangle>)) (end_node (p\<langle>i,j\<rangle>))"
unfolding plus_paths
apply (rule exI)
apply (insert prems)
by (auto intro:sub_path_is_path[of "\<A>" p i j] simp:sub_path_def)
lemma combine_fthreads:
assumes range: "i < j" "j \<le> k"
shows
"has_fth p i k m r =
(\<exists>n. has_fth p i j m n \<and> has_fth p j k n r)" (is "?L = ?R")
proof (intro iffI)
assume "?L"
then obtain \<theta>
where "is_fthread \<theta> p i k"
and [simp]: "\<theta> i = m" "\<theta> k = r"
by (auto simp:has_fth_def)
with range
have "is_fthread \<theta> p i j" and "is_fthread \<theta> p j k"
by (auto simp:is_fthread_def)
hence "has_fth p i j m (\<theta> j)" and "has_fth p j k (\<theta> j) r"
by (auto simp:has_fth_def)
thus "?R" by auto
next
assume "?R"
then obtain n \<theta>1 \<theta>2
where ths: "is_fthread \<theta>1 p i j" "is_fthread \<theta>2 p j k"
and [simp]: "\<theta>1 i = m" "\<theta>1 j = n" "\<theta>2 j = n" "\<theta>2 k = r"
by (auto simp:has_fth_def)
let ?\<theta> = "(\<lambda>i. if i < j then \<theta>1 i else \<theta>2 i)"
have "is_fthread ?\<theta> p i k"
unfolding is_fthread_def
proof
fix l assume range: "l \<in> {i..<k}"
show "eqlat p ?\<theta> l"
proof (cases rule:three_cases)
assume "Suc l < j"
with ths range show ?thesis
unfolding is_fthread_def Ball_def
by simp
next
assume "Suc l = j"
hence "l < j" "\<theta>2 (Suc l) = \<theta>1 (Suc l)" by auto
with ths range show ?thesis
unfolding is_fthread_def Ball_def
by simp
next
assume "j \<le> l"
with ths range show ?thesis
unfolding is_fthread_def Ball_def
by simp
qed arith
qed
moreover
have "?\<theta> i = m" "?\<theta> k = r" using range by auto
ultimately show "has_fth p i k m r"
by (auto simp:has_fth_def)
qed
lemma desc_is_fthread:
"is_desc_fthread \<theta> p i k \<Longrightarrow> is_fthread \<theta> p i k"
unfolding is_desc_fthread_def
by simp
lemma combine_dfthreads:
assumes range: "i < j" "j \<le> k"
shows
"has_desc_fth p i k m r =
(\<exists>n. (has_desc_fth p i j m n \<and> has_fth p j k n r)
\<or> (has_fth p i j m n \<and> has_desc_fth p j k n r))" (is "?L = ?R")
proof
assume "?L"
then obtain \<theta>
where desc: "is_desc_fthread \<theta> p i k"
and [simp]: "\<theta> i = m" "\<theta> k = r"
by (auto simp:has_desc_fth_def)
hence "is_fthread \<theta> p i k"
by (simp add: desc_is_fthread)
with range have fths: "is_fthread \<theta> p i j" "is_fthread \<theta> p j k"
unfolding is_fthread_def
by auto
hence hfths: "has_fth p i j m (\<theta> j)" "has_fth p j k (\<theta> j) r"
by (auto simp:has_fth_def)
from desc obtain l
where "i \<le> l" "l < k"
and "descat p \<theta> l"
by (auto simp:is_desc_fthread_def)
with fths
have "is_desc_fthread \<theta> p i j \<or> is_desc_fthread \<theta> p j k"
unfolding is_desc_fthread_def
by (cases "l < j") auto
hence "has_desc_fth p i j m (\<theta> j) \<or> has_desc_fth p j k (\<theta> j) r"
by (auto simp:has_desc_fth_def)
with hfths show ?R
by auto
next
assume "?R"
then obtain n \<theta>1 \<theta>2
where "(is_desc_fthread \<theta>1 p i j \<and> is_fthread \<theta>2 p j k)
\<or> (is_fthread \<theta>1 p i j \<and> is_desc_fthread \<theta>2 p j k)"
and [simp]: "\<theta>1 i = m" "\<theta>1 j = n" "\<theta>2 j = n" "\<theta>2 k = r"
by (auto simp:has_fth_def has_desc_fth_def)
hence ths2: "is_fthread \<theta>1 p i j" "is_fthread \<theta>2 p j k"
and dths: "is_desc_fthread \<theta>1 p i j \<or> is_desc_fthread \<theta>2 p j k"
by (auto simp:desc_is_fthread)
let ?\<theta> = "(\<lambda>i. if i < j then \<theta>1 i else \<theta>2 i)"
have "is_fthread ?\<theta> p i k"
unfolding is_fthread_def
proof
fix l assume range: "l \<in> {i..<k}"
show "eqlat p ?\<theta> l"
proof (cases rule:three_cases)
assume "Suc l < j"
with ths2 range show ?thesis
unfolding is_fthread_def Ball_def
by simp
next
assume "Suc l = j"
hence "l < j" "\<theta>2 (Suc l) = \<theta>1 (Suc l)" by auto
with ths2 range show ?thesis
unfolding is_fthread_def Ball_def
by simp
next
assume "j \<le> l"
with ths2 range show ?thesis
unfolding is_fthread_def Ball_def
by simp
qed arith
qed
moreover
from dths
have "\<exists>l. i \<le> l \<and> l < k \<and> descat p ?\<theta> l"
proof
assume "is_desc_fthread \<theta>1 p i j"
then obtain l where range: "i \<le> l" "l < j" and "descat p \<theta>1 l"
unfolding is_desc_fthread_def Bex_def by auto
hence "descat p ?\<theta> l"
by (cases "Suc l = j", auto)
with `j \<le> k` and range show ?thesis
by (rule_tac x="l" in exI, auto)
next
assume "is_desc_fthread \<theta>2 p j k"
then obtain l where range: "j \<le> l" "l < k" and "descat p \<theta>2 l"
unfolding is_desc_fthread_def Bex_def by auto
with `i < j` have "descat p ?\<theta> l" "i \<le> l"
by auto
with range show ?thesis
by (rule_tac x="l" in exI, auto)
qed
ultimately have "is_desc_fthread ?\<theta> p i k"
by (simp add: is_desc_fthread_def Bex_def)
moreover
have "?\<theta> i = m" "?\<theta> k = r" using range by auto
ultimately show "has_desc_fth p i k m r"
by (auto simp:has_desc_fth_def)
qed
lemma fth_single:
"has_fth p i (Suc i) m n = eql (snd (p i)) m n" (is "?L = ?R")
proof
assume "?L" thus "?R"
unfolding is_fthread_def Ball_def has_fth_def
by auto
next
let ?\<theta> = "\<lambda>k. if k = i then m else n"
assume edge: "?R"
hence "is_fthread ?\<theta> p i (Suc i) \<and> ?\<theta> i = m \<and> ?\<theta> (Suc i) = n"
unfolding is_fthread_def Ball_def
by auto
thus "?L"
unfolding has_fth_def
by auto
qed
lemma desc_fth_single:
"has_desc_fth p i (Suc i) m n =
dsc (snd (p i)) m n" (is "?L = ?R")
proof
assume "?L" thus "?R"
unfolding is_desc_fthread_def has_desc_fth_def is_fthread_def
Bex_def
by (elim exE conjE) (case_tac "k = i", auto)
next
let ?\<theta> = "\<lambda>k. if k = i then m else n"
assume edge: "?R"
hence "is_desc_fthread ?\<theta> p i (Suc i) \<and> ?\<theta> i = m \<and> ?\<theta> (Suc i) = n"
unfolding is_desc_fthread_def is_fthread_def Ball_def Bex_def
by auto
thus "?L"
unfolding has_desc_fth_def
by auto
qed
lemma mk_eql: "(G \<turnstile> m \<leadsto>\<^bsup>e\<^esup> n) \<Longrightarrow> eql G m n"
by (cases e, auto)
lemma eql_scgcomp:
"eql (G * H) m r =
(\<exists>n. eql G m n \<and> eql H n r)" (is "?L = ?R")
proof
show "?L \<Longrightarrow> ?R"
by (auto simp:in_grcomp intro!:mk_eql)
assume "?R"
then obtain n where l: "eql G m n" and r:"eql H n r" by auto
thus ?L
by (cases "dsc G m n") (auto simp:in_grcomp mult_sedge_def)
qed
lemma desc_scgcomp:
"dsc (G * H) m r =
(\<exists>n. (dsc G m n \<and> eql H n r) \<or> (eq G m n \<and> dsc H n r))" (is "?L = ?R")
proof
show "?R \<Longrightarrow> ?L" by (auto simp:in_grcomp mult_sedge_def)
assume "?L"
thus ?R
by (auto simp:in_grcomp mult_sedge_def)
(case_tac "e", auto, case_tac "e'", auto)
qed
lemma has_fth_unfold:
assumes "i < j"
shows "has_fth p i j m n =
(\<exists>r. has_fth p i (Suc i) m r \<and> has_fth p (Suc i) j r n)"
by (rule combine_fthreads) (insert `i < j`, auto)
lemma has_dfth_unfold:
assumes range: "i < j"
shows
"has_desc_fth p i j m r =
(\<exists>n. (has_desc_fth p i (Suc i) m n \<and> has_fth p (Suc i) j n r)
\<or> (has_fth p i (Suc i) m n \<and> has_desc_fth p (Suc i) j n r))"
by (rule combine_dfthreads) (insert `i < j`, auto)
lemma Lemma7a:
"i \<le> j \<Longrightarrow> has_fth p i j m n = eql (prod (p\<langle>i,j\<rangle>)) m n"
proof (induct i arbitrary: m rule:inc_induct)
case base show ?case
unfolding has_fth_def is_fthread_def sub_path_def
by (auto simp:in_grunit one_sedge_def)
next
case (step i)
note IH = `\<And>m. has_fth p (Suc i) j m n =
eql (prod (p\<langle>Suc i,j\<rangle>)) m n`
have "has_fth p i j m n
= (\<exists>r. has_fth p i (Suc i) m r \<and> has_fth p (Suc i) j r n)"
by (rule has_fth_unfold[OF `i < j`])
also have "\<dots> = (\<exists>r. has_fth p i (Suc i) m r
\<and> eql (prod (p\<langle>Suc i,j\<rangle>)) r n)"
by (simp only:IH)
also have "\<dots> = (\<exists>r. eql (snd (p i)) m r
\<and> eql (prod (p\<langle>Suc i,j\<rangle>)) r n)"
by (simp only:fth_single)
also have "\<dots> = eql (snd (p i) * prod (p\<langle>Suc i,j\<rangle>)) m n"
by (simp only:eql_scgcomp)
also have "\<dots> = eql (prod (p\<langle>i,j\<rangle>)) m n"
by (simp only:prod_unfold[OF `i < j`])
finally show ?case .
qed
lemma Lemma7b:
assumes "i \<le> j"
shows
"has_desc_fth p i j m n =
dsc (prod (p\<langle>i,j\<rangle>)) m n"
using prems
proof (induct i arbitrary: m rule:inc_induct)
case base show ?case
unfolding has_desc_fth_def is_desc_fthread_def sub_path_def
by (auto simp:in_grunit one_sedge_def)
next
case (step i)
thus ?case
by (simp only:prod_unfold desc_scgcomp desc_fth_single
has_dfth_unfold fth_single Lemma7a) auto
qed
lemma descat_contract:
assumes [simp]: "increasing s"
shows
"descat (contract s p) \<theta> i =
has_desc_fth p (s i) (s (Suc i)) (\<theta> i) (\<theta> (Suc i))"
by (simp add:Lemma7b increasing_weak contract_def)
lemma eqlat_contract:
assumes [simp]: "increasing s"
shows
"eqlat (contract s p) \<theta> i =
has_fth p (s i) (s (Suc i)) (\<theta> i) (\<theta> (Suc i))"
by (auto simp:Lemma7a increasing_weak contract_def)
subsubsection {* Connecting threads *}
definition
"connect s \<theta>s = (\<lambda>k. \<theta>s (section_of s k) k)"
lemma next_in_range:
assumes [simp]: "increasing s"
assumes a: "k \<in> section s i"
shows "(Suc k \<in> section s i) \<or> (Suc k \<in> section s (Suc i))"
proof -
from a have "k < s (Suc i)" by simp
hence "Suc k < s (Suc i) \<or> Suc k = s (Suc i)" by arith
thus ?thesis
proof
assume "Suc k < s (Suc i)"
with a have "Suc k \<in> section s i" by simp
thus ?thesis ..
next
assume eq: "Suc k = s (Suc i)"
with increasing_strict have "Suc k < s (Suc (Suc i))" by simp
with eq have "Suc k \<in> section s (Suc i)" by simp
thus ?thesis ..
qed
qed
lemma connect_threads:
assumes [simp]: "increasing s"
assumes connected: "\<theta>s i (s (Suc i)) = \<theta>s (Suc i) (s (Suc i))"
assumes fth: "is_fthread (\<theta>s i) p (s i) (s (Suc i))"
shows
"is_fthread (connect s \<theta>s) p (s i) (s (Suc i))"
unfolding is_fthread_def
proof
fix k assume krng: "k \<in> section s i"
with fth have eqlat: "eqlat p (\<theta>s i) k"
unfolding is_fthread_def by simp
from krng and next_in_range
have "(Suc k \<in> section s i) \<or> (Suc k \<in> section s (Suc i))"
by simp
thus "eqlat p (connect s \<theta>s) k"
proof
assume "Suc k \<in> section s i"
with krng eqlat show ?thesis
unfolding connect_def
by (simp only:section_of_known `increasing s`)
next
assume skrng: "Suc k \<in> section s (Suc i)"
with krng have "Suc k = s (Suc i)" by auto
with krng skrng eqlat show ?thesis
unfolding connect_def
by (simp only:section_of_known connected[symmetric] `increasing s`)
qed
qed
lemma connect_dthreads:
assumes inc[simp]: "increasing s"
assumes connected: "\<theta>s i (s (Suc i)) = \<theta>s (Suc i) (s (Suc i))"
assumes fth: "is_desc_fthread (\<theta>s i) p (s i) (s (Suc i))"
shows
"is_desc_fthread (connect s \<theta>s) p (s i) (s (Suc i))"
unfolding is_desc_fthread_def
proof
show "is_fthread (connect s \<theta>s) p (s i) (s (Suc i))"
apply (rule connect_threads)
apply (insert fth)
by (auto simp:connected is_desc_fthread_def)
from fth
obtain k where dsc: "descat p (\<theta>s i) k" and krng: "k \<in> section s i"
unfolding is_desc_fthread_def by blast
from krng and next_in_range
have "(Suc k \<in> section s i) \<or> (Suc k \<in> section s (Suc i))"
by simp
hence "descat p (connect s \<theta>s) k"
proof
assume "Suc k \<in> section s i"
with krng dsc show ?thesis unfolding connect_def
by (simp only:section_of_known inc)
next
assume skrng: "Suc k \<in> section s (Suc i)"
with krng have "Suc k = s (Suc i)" by auto
with krng skrng dsc show ?thesis unfolding connect_def
by (simp only:section_of_known connected[symmetric] inc)
qed
with krng show "\<exists>k\<in>section s i. descat p (connect s \<theta>s) k" ..
qed
lemma mk_inf_thread:
assumes [simp]: "increasing s"
assumes fths: "\<And>i. i > n \<Longrightarrow> is_fthread \<theta> p (s i) (s (Suc i))"
shows "is_thread (s (Suc n)) \<theta> p"
unfolding is_thread_def
proof (intro allI impI)
fix j assume st: "s (Suc n) \<le> j"
let ?k = "section_of s j"
from in_section_of st
have rs: "j \<in> section s ?k" by simp
with st have "s (Suc n) < s (Suc ?k)" by simp
with increasing_bij have "n < ?k" by simp
with rs and fths[of ?k]
show "eqlat p \<theta> j" by (simp add:is_fthread_def)
qed
lemma mk_inf_desc_thread:
assumes [simp]: "increasing s"
assumes fths: "\<And>i. i > n \<Longrightarrow> is_fthread \<theta> p (s i) (s (Suc i))"
assumes fdths: "\<exists>\<^sub>\<infinity>i. is_desc_fthread \<theta> p (s i) (s (Suc i))"
shows "is_desc_thread \<theta> p"
unfolding is_desc_thread_def
proof (intro exI conjI)
from mk_inf_thread[of s n] is_thread_def fths
show "\<forall>i\<ge>s (Suc n). eqlat p \<theta> i" by simp
show "\<exists>\<^sub>\<infinity>l. descat p \<theta> l"
unfolding INF_nat
proof
fix i
let ?k = "section_of s i"
from fdths obtain j
where "?k < j" "is_desc_fthread \<theta> p (s j) (s (Suc j))"
unfolding INF_nat by auto
then obtain l where "s j \<le> l" and desc: "descat p \<theta> l"
unfolding is_desc_fthread_def
by auto
have "i < s (Suc ?k)" by (rule section_of2) simp
also have "\<dots> \<le> s j"
by (rule increasing_weak [of s], assumption) (insert `?k < j`, arith)
also note `\<dots> \<le> l`
finally have "i < l" .
with desc
show "\<exists>l. i < l \<and> descat p \<theta> l" by blast
qed
qed
lemma desc_ex_choice:
assumes A: "((\<exists>n.\<forall>i\<ge>n. \<exists>x. P x i) \<and> (\<exists>\<^sub>\<infinity>i. \<exists>x. Q x i))"
and imp: "\<And>x i. Q x i \<Longrightarrow> P x i"
shows "\<exists>xs. ((\<exists>n.\<forall>i\<ge>n. P (xs i) i) \<and> (\<exists>\<^sub>\<infinity>i. Q (xs i) i))"
(is "\<exists>xs. ?Ps xs \<and> ?Qs xs")
proof
let ?w = "\<lambda>i. (if (\<exists>x. Q x i) then (SOME x. Q x i)
else (SOME x. P x i))"
from A
obtain n where P: "\<And>i. n \<le> i \<Longrightarrow> \<exists>x. P x i"
by auto
{
fix i::'a assume "n \<le> i"
have "P (?w i) i"
proof (cases "\<exists>x. Q x i")
case True
hence "Q (?w i) i" by (auto intro:someI)
with imp show "P (?w i) i" .
next
case False
with P[OF `n \<le> i`] show "P (?w i) i"
by (auto intro:someI)
qed
}
hence "?Ps ?w" by (rule_tac x=n in exI) auto
moreover
from A have "\<exists>\<^sub>\<infinity>i. (\<exists>x. Q x i)" ..
hence "?Qs ?w" by (rule INF_mono) (auto intro:someI)
ultimately
show "?Ps ?w \<and> ?Qs ?w" ..
qed
lemma dthreads_join:
assumes [simp]: "increasing s"
assumes dthread: "is_desc_thread \<theta> (contract s p)"
shows "\<exists>\<theta>s. desc (\<lambda>i. is_fthread (\<theta>s i) p (s i) (s (Suc i))
\<and> \<theta>s i (s i) = \<theta> i
\<and> \<theta>s i (s (Suc i)) = \<theta> (Suc i))
(\<lambda>i. is_desc_fthread (\<theta>s i) p (s i) (s (Suc i))
\<and> \<theta>s i (s i) = \<theta> i
\<and> \<theta>s i (s (Suc i)) = \<theta> (Suc i))"
apply (rule desc_ex_choice)
apply (insert dthread)
apply (simp only:is_desc_thread_def)
apply (simp add:eqlat_contract)
apply (simp add:descat_contract)
apply (simp only:has_fth_def has_desc_fth_def)
by (auto simp:is_desc_fthread_def)
lemma INF_drop_prefix:
"(\<exists>\<^sub>\<infinity>i::nat. i > n \<and> P i) = (\<exists>\<^sub>\<infinity>i. P i)"
apply (auto simp:INF_nat)
apply (drule_tac x = "max m n" in spec)
apply (elim exE conjE)
apply (rule_tac x = "na" in exI)
by auto
lemma contract_keeps_threads:
assumes inc[simp]: "increasing s"
shows "(\<exists>\<theta>. is_desc_thread \<theta> p)
\<longleftrightarrow> (\<exists>\<theta>. is_desc_thread \<theta> (contract s p))"
(is "?A \<longleftrightarrow> ?B")
proof
assume "?A"
then obtain \<theta> n
where fr: "\<forall>i\<ge>n. eqlat p \<theta> i"
and ds: "\<exists>\<^sub>\<infinity>i. descat p \<theta> i"
unfolding is_desc_thread_def
by auto
let ?c\<theta> = "\<lambda>i. \<theta> (s i)"
have "is_desc_thread ?c\<theta> (contract s p)"
unfolding is_desc_thread_def
proof (intro exI conjI)
show "\<forall>i\<ge>n. eqlat (contract s p) ?c\<theta> i"
proof (intro allI impI)
fix i assume "n \<le> i"
also have "i \<le> s i"
using increasing_inc by auto
finally have "n \<le> s i" .
with fr have "is_fthread \<theta> p (s i) (s (Suc i))"
unfolding is_fthread_def by auto
hence "has_fth p (s i) (s (Suc i)) (\<theta> (s i)) (\<theta> (s (Suc i)))"
unfolding has_fth_def by auto
with less_imp_le[OF increasing_strict]
have "eql (prod (p\<langle>s i,s (Suc i)\<rangle>)) (\<theta> (s i)) (\<theta> (s (Suc i)))"
by (simp add:Lemma7a)
thus "eqlat (contract s p) ?c\<theta> i" unfolding contract_def
by auto
qed
show "\<exists>\<^sub>\<infinity>i. descat (contract s p) ?c\<theta> i"
unfolding INF_nat
proof
fix i
let ?K = "section_of s (max (s (Suc i)) n)"
from `\<exists>\<^sub>\<infinity>i. descat p \<theta> i` obtain j
where "s (Suc ?K) < j" "descat p \<theta> j"
unfolding INF_nat by blast
let ?L = "section_of s j"
{
fix x assume r: "x \<in> section s ?L"
have e1: "max (s (Suc i)) n < s (Suc ?K)" by (rule section_of2) simp
note `s (Suc ?K) < j`
also have "j < s (Suc ?L)"
by (rule section_of2) simp
finally have "Suc ?K \<le> ?L"
by (simp add:increasing_bij)
with increasing_weak have "s (Suc ?K) \<le> s ?L" by simp
with e1 r have "max (s (Suc i)) n < x" by simp
hence "(s (Suc i)) < x" "n < x" by auto
}
note range_est = this
have "is_desc_fthread \<theta> p (s ?L) (s (Suc ?L))"
unfolding is_desc_fthread_def is_fthread_def
proof
show "\<forall>m\<in>section s ?L. eqlat p \<theta> m"
proof
fix m assume "m\<in>section s ?L"
with range_est(2) have "n < m" .
with fr show "eqlat p \<theta> m" by simp
qed
from in_section_of inc less_imp_le[OF `s (Suc ?K) < j`]
have "j \<in> section s ?L" .
with `descat p \<theta> j`
show "\<exists>m\<in>section s ?L. descat p \<theta> m" ..
qed
with less_imp_le[OF increasing_strict]
have a: "descat (contract s p) ?c\<theta> ?L"
unfolding contract_def Lemma7b[symmetric]
by (auto simp:Lemma7b[symmetric] has_desc_fth_def)
have "i < ?L"
proof (rule classical)
assume "\<not> i < ?L"
hence "s ?L < s (Suc i)"
by (simp add:increasing_bij)
also have "\<dots> < s ?L"
by (rule range_est(1)) (simp add:increasing_strict)
finally show ?thesis .
qed
with a show "\<exists>l. i < l \<and> descat (contract s p) ?c\<theta> l"
by blast
qed
qed
with exI show "?B" .
next
assume "?B"
then obtain \<theta>
where dthread: "is_desc_thread \<theta> (contract s p)" ..
with dthreads_join inc
obtain \<theta>s where ths_spec:
"desc (\<lambda>i. is_fthread (\<theta>s i) p (s i) (s (Suc i))
\<and> \<theta>s i (s i) = \<theta> i
\<and> \<theta>s i (s (Suc i)) = \<theta> (Suc i))
(\<lambda>i. is_desc_fthread (\<theta>s i) p (s i) (s (Suc i))
\<and> \<theta>s i (s i) = \<theta> i
\<and> \<theta>s i (s (Suc i)) = \<theta> (Suc i))"
(is "desc ?alw ?inf")
by blast
then obtain n where fr: "\<forall>i\<ge>n. ?alw i" by blast
hence connected: "\<And>i. n < i \<Longrightarrow> \<theta>s i (s (Suc i)) = \<theta>s (Suc i) (s (Suc i))"
by auto
let ?j\<theta> = "connect s \<theta>s"
from fr ths_spec have ths_spec2:
"\<And>i. i > n \<Longrightarrow> is_fthread (\<theta>s i) p (s i) (s (Suc i))"
"\<exists>\<^sub>\<infinity>i. is_desc_fthread (\<theta>s i) p (s i) (s (Suc i))"
by (auto intro:INF_mono)
have p1: "\<And>i. i > n \<Longrightarrow> is_fthread ?j\<theta> p (s i) (s (Suc i))"
by (rule connect_threads) (auto simp:connected ths_spec2)
from ths_spec2(2)
have "\<exists>\<^sub>\<infinity>i. n < i \<and> is_desc_fthread (\<theta>s i) p (s i) (s (Suc i))"
unfolding INF_drop_prefix .
hence p2: "\<exists>\<^sub>\<infinity>i. is_desc_fthread ?j\<theta> p (s i) (s (Suc i))"
apply (rule INF_mono)
apply (rule connect_dthreads)
by (auto simp:connected)
with `increasing s` p1
have "is_desc_thread ?j\<theta> p"
by (rule mk_inf_desc_thread)
with exI show "?A" .
qed
lemma repeated_edge:
assumes "\<And>i. i > n \<Longrightarrow> dsc (snd (p i)) k k"
shows "is_desc_thread (\<lambda>i. k) p"
proof-
have th: "\<forall> m. \<exists>na>m. n < na" by arith
show ?thesis using prems
unfolding is_desc_thread_def
apply (auto)
apply (rule_tac x="Suc n" in exI, auto)
apply (rule INF_mono[where P="\<lambda>i. n < i"])
apply (simp only:INF_nat)
by (auto simp add: th)
qed
lemma fin_from_inf:
assumes "is_thread n \<theta> p"
assumes "n < i"
assumes "i < j"
shows "is_fthread \<theta> p i j"
using prems
unfolding is_thread_def is_fthread_def
by auto
subsection {* Ramsey's Theorem *}
definition
"set2pair S = (THE (x,y). x < y \<and> S = {x,y})"
lemma set2pair_conv:
fixes x y :: nat
assumes "x < y"
shows "set2pair {x, y} = (x, y)"
unfolding set2pair_def
proof (rule the_equality, simp_all only:split_conv split_paired_all)
from `x < y` show "x < y \<and> {x,y}={x,y}" by simp
next
fix a b
assume a: "a < b \<and> {x, y} = {a, b}"
hence "{a, b} = {x, y}" by simp_all
hence "(a, b) = (x, y) \<or> (a, b) = (y, x)"
by (cases "x = y") auto
thus "(a, b) = (x, y)"
proof
assume "(a, b) = (y, x)"
with a and `x < y`
show ?thesis by auto (* contradiction *)
qed
qed
definition
"set2list = inv set"
lemma finite_set2list:
assumes "finite S"
shows "set (set2list S) = S"
unfolding set2list_def
proof (rule f_inv_f)
from `finite S` have "\<exists>l. set l = S"
by (rule finite_list)
thus "S \<in> range set"
unfolding image_def
by auto
qed
corollary RamseyNatpairs:
fixes S :: "'a set"
and f :: "nat \<times> nat \<Rightarrow> 'a"
assumes "finite S"
and inS: "\<And>x y. x < y \<Longrightarrow> f (x, y) \<in> S"
obtains T :: "nat set" and s :: "'a"
where "infinite T"
and "s \<in> S"
and "\<And>x y. \<lbrakk>x \<in> T; y \<in> T; x < y\<rbrakk> \<Longrightarrow> f (x, y) = s"
proof -
from `finite S`
have "set (set2list S) = S" by (rule finite_set2list)
then
obtain l where S: "S = set l" by auto
also from set_conv_nth have "\<dots> = {l ! i |i. i < length l}" .
finally have "S = {l ! i |i. i < length l}" .
let ?s = "length l"
from inS
have index_less: "\<And>x y. x \<noteq> y \<Longrightarrow> index_of l (f (set2pair {x, y})) < ?s"
proof -
fix x y :: nat
assume neq: "x \<noteq> y"
have "f (set2pair {x, y}) \<in> S"
proof (cases "x < y")
case True hence "set2pair {x, y} = (x, y)"
by (rule set2pair_conv)
with True inS
show ?thesis by simp
next
case False
with neq have y_less: "y < x" by simp
have x:"{x,y} = {y,x}" by auto
with y_less have "set2pair {x, y} = (y, x)"
by (simp add:set2pair_conv)
with y_less inS
show ?thesis by simp
qed
thus "index_of l (f (set2pair {x, y})) < length l"
by (simp add: S index_of_length)
qed
have "\<exists>Y. infinite Y \<and>
(\<exists>t. t < ?s \<and>
(\<forall>x\<in>Y. \<forall>y\<in>Y. x \<noteq> y \<longrightarrow>
index_of l (f (set2pair {x, y})) = t))"
by (rule Ramsey2[of "UNIV::nat set", simplified])
(auto simp:index_less)
then obtain T i
where inf: "infinite T"
and "i < length l"
and d: "\<And>x y. \<lbrakk>x \<in> T; y\<in>T; x \<noteq> y\<rbrakk>
\<Longrightarrow> index_of l (f (set2pair {x, y})) = i"
by auto
have "l ! i \<in> S" unfolding S
by (rule nth_mem)
moreover
have "\<And>x y. x \<in> T \<Longrightarrow> y\<in>T \<Longrightarrow> x < y
\<Longrightarrow> f (x, y) = l ! i"
proof -
fix x y assume "x \<in> T" "y \<in> T" "x < y"
with d have
"index_of l (f (set2pair {x, y})) = i" by auto
with `x < y`
have "i = index_of l (f (x, y))"
by (simp add:set2pair_conv)
with `i < length l`
show "f (x, y) = l ! i"
by (auto intro:index_of_member[symmetric] iff:index_of_length)
qed
moreover note inf
ultimately
show ?thesis using prems
by blast
qed
subsection {* Main Result *}
theorem LJA_Theorem4:
assumes "bounded_acg P \<A>"
shows "SCT \<A> \<longleftrightarrow> SCT' \<A>"
proof
assume "SCT \<A>"
show "SCT' \<A>"
proof (rule classical)
assume "\<not> SCT' \<A>"
then obtain n G
where in_closure: "(tcl \<A>) \<turnstile> n \<leadsto>\<^bsup>G\<^esup> n"
and idemp: "G * G = G"
and no_strict_arc: "\<forall>p. \<not>(G \<turnstile> p \<leadsto>\<^bsup>\<down>\<^esup> p)"
unfolding SCT'_def no_bad_graphs_def by auto
from in_closure obtain k
where k_pow: "\<A> ^ k \<turnstile> n \<leadsto>\<^bsup>G\<^esup> n"
and "0 < k"
unfolding in_tcl by auto
from power_induces_path k_pow
obtain loop where loop_props:
"has_fpath \<A> loop"
"n = fst loop" "n = end_node loop"
"G = prod loop" "k = length (snd loop)" .
with `0 < k` and path_loop_graph
have "has_ipath \<A> (omega loop)" by blast
with `SCT \<A>`
have thread: "\<exists>\<theta>. is_desc_thread \<theta> (omega loop)" by (auto simp:SCT_def)
let ?s = "\<lambda>i. k * i"
let ?cp = "\<lambda>i. (n, G)"
from loop_props have "fst loop = end_node loop" by auto
with `0 < k` `k = length (snd loop)`
have "\<And>i. (omega loop)\<langle>?s i,?s (Suc i)\<rangle> = loop"
by (rule sub_path_loop)
with `n = fst loop` `G = prod loop` `k = length (snd loop)`
have a: "contract ?s (omega loop) = ?cp"
unfolding contract_def
by (simp add:path_loop_def split_def fst_p0)
from `0 < k` have "increasing ?s"
by (auto simp:increasing_def)
with thread have "\<exists>\<theta>. is_desc_thread \<theta> ?cp"
unfolding a[symmetric]
by (unfold contract_keeps_threads[symmetric])
then obtain \<theta> where desc: "is_desc_thread \<theta> ?cp" by auto
then obtain n where thr: "is_thread n \<theta> ?cp"
unfolding is_desc_thread_def is_thread_def
by auto
have "bounded_th P n \<theta>"
proof -
from `bounded_acg P \<A>`
have "bounded_acg P (tcl \<A>)" by (rule bounded_plus)
with in_closure have "bounded_scg P G"
unfolding bounded_acg_def by simp
hence "bounded_mp P ?cp"
unfolding bounded_mp_def by simp
with thr bounded_th
show ?thesis by auto
qed
with bounded_th_infinite_visit
obtain p where inf_visit: "\<exists>\<^sub>\<infinity>i. \<theta> i = p" by blast
then obtain i where "n < i" "\<theta> i = p"
by (auto simp:INF_nat)
from desc
have "\<exists>\<^sub>\<infinity>i. descat ?cp \<theta> i"
unfolding is_desc_thread_def by auto
then obtain j
where "i < j" and "descat ?cp \<theta> j"
unfolding INF_nat by auto
from inf_visit obtain k where "j < k" "\<theta> k = p"
by (auto simp:INF_nat)
from `i < j` `j < k` `n < i` thr fin_from_inf `descat ?cp \<theta> j`
have "is_desc_fthread \<theta> ?cp i k"
unfolding is_desc_fthread_def
by auto
with `\<theta> k = p` `\<theta> i = p`
have dfth: "has_desc_fth ?cp i k p p"
unfolding has_desc_fth_def
by auto
from `i < j` `j < k` have "i < k" by auto
hence "prod (?cp\<langle>i, k\<rangle>) = G"
proof (induct i rule:strict_inc_induct)
case base thus ?case by (simp add:sub_path_def)
next
case (step i) thus ?case
by (simp add:sub_path_def upt_rec[of i k] idemp)
qed
with `i < j` `j < k` dfth Lemma7b
have "dsc G p p" by auto
with no_strict_arc have False by auto
thus ?thesis ..
qed
next
assume "SCT' \<A>"
show "SCT \<A>"
proof (rule classical)
assume "\<not> SCT \<A>"
with SCT_def
obtain p
where ipath: "has_ipath \<A> p"
and no_desc_th: "\<not> (\<exists>\<theta>. is_desc_thread \<theta> p)"
by auto
from `bounded_acg P \<A>`
have "finite (dest_graph (tcl \<A>))" (is "finite ?AG")
by (intro bounded_finite bounded_plus)
from pdesc_acgplus[OF ipath]
have a: "\<And>x y. x<y \<Longrightarrow> pdesc p\<langle>x,y\<rangle> \<in> dest_graph (tcl \<A>)"
unfolding has_edge_def .
obtain S G
where "infinite S" "G \<in> dest_graph (tcl \<A>)"
and all_G: "\<And>x y. \<lbrakk> x \<in> S; y \<in> S; x < y\<rbrakk> \<Longrightarrow>
pdesc (p\<langle>x,y\<rangle>) = G"
apply (rule RamseyNatpairs[of ?AG "\<lambda>(x,y). pdesc p\<langle>x, y\<rangle>"])
apply (rule `finite (dest_graph (tcl \<A>))`)
by (simp only:split_conv, rule a, auto)
obtain n H m where
G_struct: "G = (n, H, m)" by (cases G)
let ?s = "enumerate S"
let ?q = "contract ?s p"
note all_in_S[simp] = enumerate_in_set[OF `infinite S`]
from `infinite S`
have inc[simp]: "increasing ?s"
unfolding increasing_def by (simp add:enumerate_mono)
note increasing_bij[OF this, simp]
from ipath_contract inc ipath
have "has_ipath (tcl \<A>) ?q" .
from all_G G_struct
have all_H: "\<And>i. (snd (?q i)) = H"
unfolding contract_def
by simp
have loop: "(tcl \<A>) \<turnstile> n \<leadsto>\<^bsup>H\<^esup> n"
and idemp: "H * H = H"
proof -
let ?i = "?s 0" and ?j = "?s (Suc 0)" and ?k = "?s (Suc (Suc 0))"
have "pdesc (p\<langle>?i,?j\<rangle>) = G"
and "pdesc (p\<langle>?j,?k\<rangle>) = G"
and "pdesc (p\<langle>?i,?k\<rangle>) = G"
using all_G
by auto
with G_struct
have "m = end_node (p\<langle>?i,?j\<rangle>)"
"n = fst (p\<langle>?j,?k\<rangle>)"
and Hs: "prod (p\<langle>?i,?j\<rangle>) = H"
"prod (p\<langle>?j,?k\<rangle>) = H"
"prod (p\<langle>?i,?k\<rangle>) = H"
by auto
hence "m = n" by simp
thus "tcl \<A> \<turnstile> n \<leadsto>\<^bsup>H\<^esup> n"
using G_struct `G \<in> dest_graph (tcl \<A>)`
by (simp add:has_edge_def)
from sub_path_prod[of ?i ?j ?k p]
show "H * H = H"
unfolding Hs by simp
qed
moreover have "\<And>k. \<not>dsc H k k"
proof
fix k :: nat assume "dsc H k k"
with all_H repeated_edge
have "\<exists>\<theta>. is_desc_thread \<theta> ?q" by fast
with inc have "\<exists>\<theta>. is_desc_thread \<theta> p"
by (subst contract_keeps_threads)
with no_desc_th
show False ..
qed
ultimately
have False
using `SCT' \<A>`[unfolded SCT'_def no_bad_graphs_def]
by blast
thus ?thesis ..
qed
qed
lemma LJA_apply:
assumes fin: "finite_acg A"
assumes "SCT' A"
shows "SCT A"
proof -
from fin obtain P where b: "bounded_acg P A"
unfolding finite_acg_def ..
show ?thesis using LJA_Theorem4[OF b] and `SCT' A`
by simp
qed
end