diff -r 279da0358aa9 -r 09a6c44a48ea doc-src/TutorialI/CTL/document/Base.tex --- a/doc-src/TutorialI/CTL/document/Base.tex Thu Jul 26 18:23:38 2001 +0200 +++ b/doc-src/TutorialI/CTL/document/Base.tex Fri Aug 03 18:04:55 2001 +0200 @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ (specifications) \cite{ClarkeGP-book,Huth-Ryan-book}. Its foundations are set theoretic and this section will explore them in HOL\@. This is done in two steps. First we consider a simple modal logic called propositional dynamic -logic (PDL), which we then extend to the temporal logic CTL, which is +logic (PDL)\@. We then proceed to the temporal logic CTL, which is used in many real model checkers. In each case we give both a traditional semantics (\isa{{\isasymTurnstile}}) and a recursive function \isa{mc} that maps a formula into the set of all states of @@ -25,8 +25,9 @@ \underscoreon -Our models are \emph{transition systems}, i.e.\ sets of \emph{states} with -transitions between them, as shown in this simple example: +Our models are \emph{transition systems}:\index{transition systems} +sets of \emph{states} with +transitions between them. Here is a simple example: \begin{center} \unitlength.5mm \thicklines @@ -49,20 +50,19 @@ \put(91,21){\makebox(0,0)[bl]{$s_2$}} \end{picture} \end{center} -Each state has a unique name or number ($s_0,s_1,s_2$), and in each -state certain \emph{atomic propositions} ($p,q,r$) are true. -The aim of temporal logic is to formalize statements such as ``there is no -path starting from $s_2$ leading to a state where $p$ or $q$ -are true'', which is true, and ``on all paths starting from $s_0$ $q$ is always true'', -which is false. +Each state has a unique name or number ($s_0,s_1,s_2$), and in each state +certain \emph{atomic propositions} ($p,q,r$) hold. The aim of temporal logic +is to formalize statements such as ``there is no path starting from $s_2$ +leading to a state where $p$ or $q$ holds,'' which is true, and ``on all paths +starting from $s_0$, $q$ always holds,'' which is false. -Abstracting from this concrete example, we assume there is some type of +Abstracting from this concrete example, we assume there is a type of states:% \end{isamarkuptext}% \isacommand{typedecl}\ state% \begin{isamarkuptext}% \noindent -Command \isacommand{typedecl} merely declares a new type but without +Command \commdx{typedecl} merely declares a new type but without defining it (see \S\ref{sec:typedecl}). Thus we know nothing about the type other than its existence. That is exactly what we need because \isa{state} really is an implicit parameter of our model. Of