# HG changeset patch
# User paulson
# Date 1585522440 -3600
# Node ID 1f957615cae6a45ecb856b012f75f733c5354707
# Parent  4c8edd527940d420360adffde9b761c93710a7ca# Parent  2a24c2015a61adb475eac86e931b41ff01ab45ad
merged

diff -r 4c8edd527940 -r 1f957615cae6 src/HOL/Quotient.thy
--- a/src/HOL/Quotient.thy	Sun Mar 29 22:30:43 2020 +0200
+++ b/src/HOL/Quotient.thy	Sun Mar 29 23:54:00 2020 +0100
@@ -253,27 +253,29 @@
   fixes P::"'a \<Rightarrow> bool"
   and x::"'a"
   assumes a: "equivp R2"
-  shows   "(Ball (Respects (R1 ===> R2)) (\<lambda>f. P (f x)) = All (\<lambda>f. P (f x)))"
-  apply(rule iffI)
-  apply(rule allI)
-  apply(drule_tac x="\<lambda>y. f x" in bspec)
-  apply(simp add: in_respects rel_fun_def)
-  apply(rule impI)
-  using a equivp_reflp_symp_transp[of "R2"]
-  apply (auto elim: equivpE reflpE)
-  done
+  shows "(Ball (Respects (R1 ===> R2)) (\<lambda>f. P (f x)) = All (\<lambda>f. P (f x)))"
+proof (intro allI iffI)
+  fix f
+  assume "\<forall>f \<in> Respects (R1 ===> R2). P (f x)"
+  moreover have "(\<lambda>y. f x) \<in> Respects (R1 ===> R2)"
+    using a equivp_reflp_symp_transp[of "R2"]
+    by(auto simp add: in_respects rel_fun_def elim: equivpE reflpE)
+  ultimately show "P (f x)"
+    by auto
+qed auto
 
 lemma bex_reg_eqv_range:
   assumes a: "equivp R2"
   shows   "(Bex (Respects (R1 ===> R2)) (\<lambda>f. P (f x)) = Ex (\<lambda>f. P (f x)))"
-  apply(auto)
-  apply(rule_tac x="\<lambda>y. f x" in bexI)
-  apply(simp)
-  apply(simp add: Respects_def in_respects rel_fun_def)
-  apply(rule impI)
-  using a equivp_reflp_symp_transp[of "R2"]
-  apply (auto elim: equivpE reflpE)
-  done
+proof -
+  { fix f
+    assume "P (f x)"
+    have "(\<lambda>y. f x) \<in> Respects (R1 ===> R2)"
+      using a equivp_reflp_symp_transp[of "R2"]
+      by (auto simp add: Respects_def in_respects rel_fun_def elim: equivpE reflpE) }
+  then show ?thesis
+    by auto
+qed
 
 (* Next four lemmas are unused *)
 lemma all_reg:
@@ -322,35 +324,42 @@
   assumes q: "Quotient3 R1 Abs1 Rep1"
   and     a: "(R1 ===> R2) f g"
   shows      "(R1 ===> R2) (Babs (Respects R1) f) (Babs (Respects R1) g)"
-  apply (auto simp add: Babs_def in_respects rel_fun_def)
-  apply (subgoal_tac "x \<in> Respects R1 \<and> y \<in> Respects R1")
-  using a apply (simp add: Babs_def rel_fun_def)
-  apply (simp add: in_respects rel_fun_def)
-  using Quotient3_rel[OF q]
-  by metis
+proof (clarsimp simp add: Babs_def in_respects rel_fun_def)
+  fix x y
+  assume "R1 x y"
+  then have "x \<in> Respects R1 \<and> y \<in> Respects R1"
+    unfolding in_respects rel_fun_def using Quotient3_rel[OF q]by metis
+  then show "R2 (Babs (Respects R1) f x) (Babs (Respects R1) g y)"
+  using \<open>R1 x y\<close> a by (simp add: Babs_def rel_fun_def)
+qed
 
 lemma babs_prs:
   assumes q1: "Quotient3 R1 Abs1 Rep1"
   and     q2: "Quotient3 R2 Abs2 Rep2"
-  shows "((Rep1 ---> Abs2) (Babs (Respects R1) ((Abs1 ---> Rep2) f))) = f"
-  apply (rule ext)
-  apply (simp add:)
-  apply (subgoal_tac "Rep1 x \<in> Respects R1")
-  apply (simp add: Babs_def Quotient3_abs_rep[OF q1] Quotient3_abs_rep[OF q2])
-  apply (simp add: in_respects Quotient3_rel_rep[OF q1])
-  done
+shows "((Rep1 ---> Abs2) (Babs (Respects R1) ((Abs1 ---> Rep2) f))) = f"
+proof -
+  { fix x
+    have "Rep1 x \<in> Respects R1"
+      by (simp add: in_respects Quotient3_rel_rep[OF q1])
+    then have "Abs2 (Babs (Respects R1) ((Abs1 ---> Rep2) f) (Rep1 x)) = f x" 
+      by (simp add: Babs_def Quotient3_abs_rep[OF q1] Quotient3_abs_rep[OF q2])
+  }
+  then show ?thesis
+    by force
+qed
 
 lemma babs_simp:
   assumes q: "Quotient3 R1 Abs Rep"
   shows "((R1 ===> R2) (Babs (Respects R1) f) (Babs (Respects R1) g)) = ((R1 ===> R2) f g)"
-  apply(rule iffI)
-  apply(simp_all only: babs_rsp[OF q])
-  apply(auto simp add: Babs_def rel_fun_def)
-  apply(metis Babs_def in_respects  Quotient3_rel[OF q])
-  done
+         (is "?lhs = ?rhs")
+proof
+  assume ?lhs
+  then show ?rhs
+    unfolding rel_fun_def by (metis Babs_def in_respects  Quotient3_rel[OF q])
+qed (simp add: babs_rsp[OF q])
 
-(* If a user proves that a particular functional relation
-   is an equivalence this may be useful in regularising *)
+text \<open>If a user proves that a particular functional relation
+   is an equivalence, this may be useful in regularising\<close>
 lemma babs_reg_eqv:
   shows "equivp R \<Longrightarrow> Babs (Respects R) P = P"
   by (simp add: fun_eq_iff Babs_def in_respects equivp_reflp)
@@ -372,7 +381,8 @@
   shows "Ex1 (\<lambda>x. x \<in> Respects R \<and> f x) = Ex1 (\<lambda>x. x \<in> Respects R \<and> g x)"
   using a by (auto elim: rel_funE simp add: Ex1_def in_respects)
 
-(* 2 lemmas needed for cleaning of quantifiers *)
+text \<open>Two lemmas needed for cleaning of quantifiers\<close>
+
 lemma all_prs:
   assumes a: "Quotient3 R absf repf"
   shows "Ball (Respects R) ((absf ---> id) f) = All f"
@@ -410,10 +420,10 @@
 lemma ex1_prs:
   assumes "Quotient3 R absf repf"
   shows "((absf ---> id) ---> id) (Bex1_rel R) f = Ex1 f"
-  apply (auto simp: Bex1_rel_def Respects_def)
-  apply (metis Quotient3_def assms)
-  apply (metis (full_types) Quotient3_def assms)
-  by (meson Quotient3_rel assms)
+         (is "?lhs = ?rhs")
+  using assms
+  apply (auto simp add: Bex1_rel_def Respects_def)
+  by (metis (full_types) Quotient3_def)+
 
 lemma bex1_bexeq_reg:
   shows "(\<exists>!x\<in>Respects R. P x) \<longrightarrow> (Bex1_rel R (\<lambda>x. P x))"
@@ -543,7 +553,6 @@
 
 subsection \<open>Quotient composition\<close>
 
-
 lemma OOO_quotient3:
   fixes R1 :: "'a \<Rightarrow> 'a \<Rightarrow> bool"
   fixes Abs1 :: "'a \<Rightarrow> 'b" and Rep1 :: "'b \<Rightarrow> 'a"
@@ -558,29 +567,35 @@
 proof -
   have *: "(R1 OOO R2') r r \<and> (R1 OOO R2') s s \<and> (Abs2 \<circ> Abs1) r = (Abs2 \<circ> Abs1) s
            \<longleftrightarrow> (R1 OOO R2') r s" for r s
-    apply safe
-    subgoal for a b c d
-      apply simp
-      apply (rule_tac b="Rep1 (Abs1 r)" in relcomppI)
-      using Quotient3_refl1 R1 rep_abs_rsp apply fastforce
-      apply (rule_tac b="Rep1 (Abs1 s)" in relcomppI)
-       apply (metis (full_types) Rep1 Abs1 Quotient3_rel R2  Quotient3_refl1 [OF R1] Quotient3_refl2 [OF R1] Quotient3_rel_abs [OF R1])
-      by (metis Quotient3_rel R1 rep_abs_rsp_left)
-    subgoal for x y
-      apply (drule Abs1)
-        apply (erule Quotient3_refl2 [OF R1])
-       apply (erule Quotient3_refl1 [OF R1])
-      apply (drule Quotient3_refl1 [OF R2], drule Rep1)
-      by (metis (full_types) Quotient3_def R1 relcompp.relcompI)
-    subgoal for x y
-      apply (drule Abs1)
-        apply (erule Quotient3_refl2 [OF R1])
-       apply (erule Quotient3_refl1 [OF R1])
-      apply (drule Quotient3_refl2 [OF R2], drule Rep1)
-      by (metis (full_types) Quotient3_def R1 relcompp.relcompI)
-    subgoal for x y
-      by simp (metis (full_types) Abs1 Quotient3_rel R1 R2)
-    done
+  proof (intro iffI conjI; clarify) 
+    show "(R1 OOO R2') r s"
+      if r: "R1 r a" "R2' a b" "R1 b r" and eq: "(Abs2 \<circ> Abs1) r = (Abs2 \<circ> Abs1) s" 
+        and s: "R1 s c" "R2' c d" "R1 d s" for a b c d
+    proof -
+      have "R1 r (Rep1 (Abs1 r))"
+        using r Quotient3_refl1 R1 rep_abs_rsp by fastforce
+      moreover have "R2' (Rep1 (Abs1 r)) (Rep1 (Abs1 s))"
+        using that
+        apply (simp add: )
+        apply (metis (full_types) Rep1 Abs1 Quotient3_rel R2 Quotient3_refl1 [OF R1] Quotient3_refl2 [OF R1] Quotient3_rel_abs [OF R1])
+        done
+      moreover have "R1 (Rep1 (Abs1 s)) s"
+        by (metis s Quotient3_rel R1 rep_abs_rsp_left)
+      ultimately show ?thesis
+        by (metis relcomppI)
+    qed
+  next
+    fix x y
+    assume xy: "R1 r x" "R2' x y" "R1 y s"
+    then have "R2 (Abs1 x) (Abs1 y)"
+      by (iprover dest: Abs1 elim: Quotient3_refl1 [OF R1] Quotient3_refl2 [OF R1])
+    then have "R2' (Rep1 (Abs1 x)) (Rep1 (Abs1 x))" "R2' (Rep1 (Abs1 y)) (Rep1 (Abs1 y))"
+      by (simp_all add: Quotient3_refl1 [OF R2] Quotient3_refl2 [OF R2] Rep1)
+    with \<open>R1 r x\<close> \<open>R1 y s\<close> show "(R1 OOO R2') r r" "(R1 OOO R2') s s"
+      by (metis (full_types) Quotient3_def R1 relcompp.relcompI)+
+    show "(Abs2 \<circ> Abs1) r = (Abs2 \<circ> Abs1) s"
+      using xy by simp (metis (full_types) Abs1 Quotient3_rel R1 R2)
+  qed
   show ?thesis
     apply (rule Quotient3I)
     using * apply (simp_all add: o_def Quotient3_abs_rep [OF R2] Quotient3_abs_rep [OF R1])
diff -r 4c8edd527940 -r 1f957615cae6 src/HOL/Transitive_Closure.thy
--- a/src/HOL/Transitive_Closure.thy	Sun Mar 29 22:30:43 2020 +0200
+++ b/src/HOL/Transitive_Closure.thy	Sun Mar 29 23:54:00 2020 +0100
@@ -87,9 +87,7 @@
 
 lemma r_into_rtrancl [intro]: "\<And>p. p \<in> r \<Longrightarrow> p \<in> r\<^sup>*"
   \<comment> \<open>\<open>rtrancl\<close> of \<open>r\<close> contains \<open>r\<close>\<close>
-  apply (simp only: split_tupled_all)
-  apply (erule rtrancl_refl [THEN rtrancl_into_rtrancl])
-  done
+  by (simp add: split_tupled_all rtrancl_refl [THEN rtrancl_into_rtrancl])
 
 lemma r_into_rtranclp [intro]: "r x y \<Longrightarrow> r\<^sup>*\<^sup>* x y"
   \<comment> \<open>\<open>rtrancl\<close> of \<open>r\<close> contains \<open>r\<close>\<close>
@@ -97,10 +95,11 @@
 
 lemma rtranclp_mono: "r \<le> s \<Longrightarrow> r\<^sup>*\<^sup>* \<le> s\<^sup>*\<^sup>*"
   \<comment> \<open>monotonicity of \<open>rtrancl\<close>\<close>
-  apply (rule predicate2I)
-  apply (erule rtranclp.induct)
-   apply (rule_tac [2] rtranclp.rtrancl_into_rtrancl, blast+)
-  done
+proof (rule predicate2I)
+  show "s\<^sup>*\<^sup>* x y" if "r \<le> s" "r\<^sup>*\<^sup>* x y" for x y
+    using \<open>r\<^sup>*\<^sup>* x y\<close> \<open>r \<le> s\<close>
+    by (induction rule: rtranclp.induct) (blast intro: rtranclp.rtrancl_into_rtrancl)+
+qed
 
 lemma mono_rtranclp[mono]: "(\<And>a b. x a b \<longrightarrow> y a b) \<Longrightarrow> x\<^sup>*\<^sup>* a b \<longrightarrow> y\<^sup>*\<^sup>* a b"
    using rtranclp_mono[of x y] by auto
@@ -164,9 +163,7 @@
 qed
 
 lemma rtrancl_Int_subset: "Id \<subseteq> s \<Longrightarrow> (r\<^sup>* \<inter> s) O r \<subseteq> s \<Longrightarrow> r\<^sup>* \<subseteq> s"
-  apply clarify
-  apply (erule rtrancl_induct, auto)
-  done
+  by (fastforce elim: rtrancl_induct)
 
 lemma converse_rtranclp_into_rtranclp: "r a b \<Longrightarrow> r\<^sup>*\<^sup>* b c \<Longrightarrow> r\<^sup>*\<^sup>* a c"
   by (rule rtranclp_trans) iprover+
@@ -176,27 +173,23 @@
 text \<open>\<^medskip> More \<^term>\<open>r\<^sup>*\<close> equations and inclusions.\<close>
 
 lemma rtranclp_idemp [simp]: "(r\<^sup>*\<^sup>*)\<^sup>*\<^sup>* = r\<^sup>*\<^sup>*"
-  apply (auto intro!: order_antisym)
-  apply (erule rtranclp_induct)
-   apply (rule rtranclp.rtrancl_refl)
-  apply (blast intro: rtranclp_trans)
-  done
+proof -
+  have "r\<^sup>*\<^sup>*\<^sup>*\<^sup>* x y \<Longrightarrow> r\<^sup>*\<^sup>* x y" for x y
+    by (induction rule: rtranclp_induct) (blast intro: rtranclp_trans)+
+  then show ?thesis
+    by (auto intro!: order_antisym)
+qed
 
 lemmas rtrancl_idemp [simp] = rtranclp_idemp [to_set]
 
 lemma rtrancl_idemp_self_comp [simp]: "R\<^sup>* O R\<^sup>* = R\<^sup>*"
-  apply (rule set_eqI)
-  apply (simp only: split_tupled_all)
-  apply (blast intro: rtrancl_trans)
-  done
+  by (force intro: rtrancl_trans)
 
 lemma rtrancl_subset_rtrancl: "r \<subseteq> s\<^sup>* \<Longrightarrow> r\<^sup>* \<subseteq> s\<^sup>*"
-by (drule rtrancl_mono, simp)
+  by (drule rtrancl_mono, simp)
 
 lemma rtranclp_subset: "R \<le> S \<Longrightarrow> S \<le> R\<^sup>*\<^sup>* \<Longrightarrow> S\<^sup>*\<^sup>* = R\<^sup>*\<^sup>*"
-  apply (drule rtranclp_mono)
-  apply (drule rtranclp_mono, simp)
-  done
+  by (fastforce dest: rtranclp_mono)
 
 lemmas rtrancl_subset = rtranclp_subset [to_set]
 
@@ -319,11 +312,15 @@
 
 subsection \<open>Transitive closure\<close>
 
-lemma trancl_mono: "\<And>p. p \<in> r\<^sup>+ \<Longrightarrow> r \<subseteq> s \<Longrightarrow> p \<in> s\<^sup>+"
-  apply (simp add: split_tupled_all)
-  apply (erule trancl.induct)
-   apply (iprover dest: subsetD)+
-  done
+lemma trancl_mono:
+  assumes "p \<in> r\<^sup>+" "r \<subseteq> s"
+  shows "p \<in> s\<^sup>+"
+proof -
+  have "\<lbrakk>(a, b) \<in> r\<^sup>+; r \<subseteq> s\<rbrakk> \<Longrightarrow> (a, b) \<in> s\<^sup>+" for a b
+    by (induction rule: trancl.induct) (iprover dest: subsetD)+
+  with assms show ?thesis
+    by (cases p) force
+qed
 
 lemma r_into_trancl': "\<And>p. p \<in> r \<Longrightarrow> p \<in> r\<^sup>+"
   by (simp only: split_tupled_all) (erule r_into_trancl)
@@ -342,12 +339,19 @@
 
 lemmas rtrancl_into_trancl1 = rtranclp_into_tranclp1 [to_set]
 
-lemma rtranclp_into_tranclp2: "r a b \<Longrightarrow> r\<^sup>*\<^sup>* b c \<Longrightarrow> r\<^sup>+\<^sup>+ a c"
+lemma rtranclp_into_tranclp2:
+  assumes "r a b" "r\<^sup>*\<^sup>* b c" shows "r\<^sup>+\<^sup>+ a c"
   \<comment> \<open>intro rule from \<open>r\<close> and \<open>rtrancl\<close>\<close>
-  apply (erule rtranclp.cases, iprover)
-  apply (rule rtranclp_trans [THEN rtranclp_into_tranclp1])
-    apply (simp | rule r_into_rtranclp)+
-  done
+  using \<open>r\<^sup>*\<^sup>* b c\<close>
+proof (cases rule: rtranclp.cases)
+  case rtrancl_refl
+  with assms show ?thesis
+    by iprover
+next
+  case rtrancl_into_rtrancl
+  with assms show ?thesis
+    by (auto intro: rtranclp_trans [THEN rtranclp_into_tranclp1])
+qed
 
 lemmas rtrancl_into_trancl2 = rtranclp_into_tranclp2 [to_set]
 
@@ -384,9 +388,7 @@
   using assms by cases simp_all
 
 lemma trancl_Int_subset: "r \<subseteq> s \<Longrightarrow> (r\<^sup>+ \<inter> s) O r \<subseteq> s \<Longrightarrow> r\<^sup>+ \<subseteq> s"
-  apply clarify
-  apply (erule trancl_induct, auto)
-  done
+  by (fastforce simp add: elim: trancl_induct)
 
 lemma trancl_unfold: "r\<^sup>+ = r \<union> r\<^sup>+ O r"
   by (auto intro: trancl_into_trancl elim: tranclE)
@@ -418,10 +420,7 @@
   using assms(2,1) by induct iprover+
 
 lemma trancl_id [simp]: "trans r \<Longrightarrow> r\<^sup>+ = r"
-  apply auto
-  apply (erule trancl_induct, assumption)
-  apply (unfold trans_def, blast)
-  done
+  unfolding trans_def by (fastforce simp add: elim: trancl_induct)
 
 lemma rtranclp_tranclp_tranclp:
   assumes "r\<^sup>*\<^sup>* x y"
@@ -435,19 +434,30 @@
 
 lemmas trancl_into_trancl2 = tranclp_into_tranclp2 [to_set]
 
-lemma tranclp_converseI: "(r\<^sup>+\<^sup>+)\<inverse>\<inverse> x y \<Longrightarrow> (r\<inverse>\<inverse>)\<^sup>+\<^sup>+ x y"
-  apply (drule conversepD)
-  apply (erule tranclp_induct)
-   apply (iprover intro: conversepI tranclp_trans)+
-  done
+lemma tranclp_converseI:
+  assumes "(r\<^sup>+\<^sup>+)\<inverse>\<inverse> x y" shows "(r\<inverse>\<inverse>)\<^sup>+\<^sup>+ x y"
+  using conversepD [OF assms]
+proof (induction rule: tranclp_induct)
+  case (base y)
+  then show ?case 
+    by (iprover intro: conversepI)
+next
+  case (step y z)
+  then show ?case
+    by (iprover intro: conversepI tranclp_trans)
+qed
 
 lemmas trancl_converseI = tranclp_converseI [to_set]
 
-lemma tranclp_converseD: "(r\<inverse>\<inverse>)\<^sup>+\<^sup>+ x y \<Longrightarrow> (r\<^sup>+\<^sup>+)\<inverse>\<inverse> x y"
-  apply (rule conversepI)
-  apply (erule tranclp_induct)
-   apply (iprover dest: conversepD intro: tranclp_trans)+
-  done
+lemma tranclp_converseD:
+  assumes "(r\<inverse>\<inverse>)\<^sup>+\<^sup>+ x y" shows "(r\<^sup>+\<^sup>+)\<inverse>\<inverse> x y"
+proof -
+  have "r\<^sup>+\<^sup>+ y x"
+    using assms
+    by (induction rule: tranclp_induct) (iprover dest: conversepD intro: tranclp_trans)+
+  then show ?thesis
+    by (rule conversepI)
+qed
 
 lemmas trancl_converseD = tranclp_converseD [to_set]
 
@@ -463,17 +473,21 @@
   assumes major: "r\<^sup>+\<^sup>+ a b"
     and cases: "\<And>y. r y b \<Longrightarrow> P y" "\<And>y z. r y z \<Longrightarrow> r\<^sup>+\<^sup>+ z b \<Longrightarrow> P z \<Longrightarrow> P y"
   shows "P a"
-  apply (rule tranclp_induct [OF tranclp_converseI, OF conversepI, OF major])
-   apply (blast intro: cases)
-  apply (blast intro: assms dest!: tranclp_converseD)
-  done
+proof -
+  have "r\<inverse>\<inverse>\<^sup>+\<^sup>+ b a"
+    by (intro tranclp_converseI conversepI major)
+  then show ?thesis
+    by (induction rule: tranclp_induct) (blast intro: cases dest: tranclp_converseD)+
+qed
 
 lemmas converse_trancl_induct = converse_tranclp_induct [to_set]
 
 lemma tranclpD: "R\<^sup>+\<^sup>+ x y \<Longrightarrow> \<exists>z. R x z \<and> R\<^sup>*\<^sup>* z y"
-  apply (erule converse_tranclp_induct, auto)
-  apply (blast intro: rtranclp_trans)
-  done
+proof (induction rule: converse_tranclp_induct)
+  case (step u v)
+  then show ?case
+    by (blast intro: rtranclp_trans)
+qed auto
 
 lemmas tranclD = tranclpD [to_set]
 
@@ -492,7 +506,7 @@
       by iprover
   next
     case rtrancl_into_rtrancl
-    from this have "tranclp r y z"
+    then have "tranclp r y z"
       by (iprover intro: rtranclp_into_tranclp1)
     with \<open>r x y\<close> step show P
       by iprover
@@ -513,17 +527,15 @@
 lemma trancl_subset_Sigma_aux: "(a, b) \<in> r\<^sup>* \<Longrightarrow> r \<subseteq> A \<times> A \<Longrightarrow> a = b \<or> a \<in> A"
   by (induct rule: rtrancl_induct) auto
 
-lemma trancl_subset_Sigma: "r \<subseteq> A \<times> A \<Longrightarrow> r\<^sup>+ \<subseteq> A \<times> A"
-  apply (clarsimp simp:)
-  apply (erule tranclE)
-   apply (blast dest!: trancl_into_rtrancl trancl_subset_Sigma_aux)+
-  done
+lemma trancl_subset_Sigma:
+  assumes "r \<subseteq> A \<times> A" shows "r\<^sup>+ \<subseteq> A \<times> A"
+proof (rule trancl_Int_subset [OF assms])
+  show "(r\<^sup>+ \<inter> A \<times> A) O r \<subseteq> A \<times> A"
+    using assms by auto
+qed
 
 lemma reflclp_tranclp [simp]: "(r\<^sup>+\<^sup>+)\<^sup>=\<^sup>= = r\<^sup>*\<^sup>*"
-  apply (safe intro!: order_antisym)
-   apply (erule tranclp_into_rtranclp)
-  apply (blast elim: rtranclp.cases dest: rtranclp_into_tranclp1)
-  done
+  by (fast elim: rtranclp.cases tranclp_into_rtranclp dest: rtranclp_into_tranclp1)
 
 lemmas reflcl_trancl [simp] = reflclp_tranclp [to_set]
 
@@ -629,19 +641,14 @@
 qed
 
 lemma trancl_subset_Field2: "r\<^sup>+ \<subseteq> Field r \<times> Field r"
-  apply clarify
-  apply (erule trancl_induct)
-   apply (auto simp: Field_def)
-  done
+  by (rule trancl_Int_subset) (auto simp: Field_def)
 
 lemma finite_trancl[simp]: "finite (r\<^sup>+) = finite r"
 proof
   show "finite (r\<^sup>+) \<Longrightarrow> finite r"
     by (blast intro: r_into_trancl' finite_subset)
   show "finite r \<Longrightarrow> finite (r\<^sup>+)"
-   apply (rule trancl_subset_Field2 [THEN finite_subset])
-   apply (auto simp: finite_Field)
-  done
+    by (auto simp: finite_Field trancl_subset_Field2 [THEN finite_subset])
 qed
 
 lemma finite_rtrancl_Image[simp]: assumes "finite R" "finite A" shows "finite (R\<^sup>* `` A)"
@@ -665,9 +672,7 @@
 next
   case (step y z)
   with xz \<open>single_valued r\<close> show ?case
-    apply (auto simp: elim: converse_rtranclE dest: single_valuedD)
-    apply (blast intro: rtrancl_trans)
-    done
+    by (auto elim: converse_rtranclE dest: single_valuedD intro: rtrancl_trans)
 qed
 
 lemma r_r_into_trancl: "(a, b) \<in> R \<Longrightarrow> (b, c) \<in> R \<Longrightarrow> (a, c) \<in> R\<^sup>+"
@@ -676,12 +681,14 @@
 lemma trancl_into_trancl: "(a, b) \<in> r\<^sup>+ \<Longrightarrow> (b, c) \<in> r \<Longrightarrow> (a, c) \<in> r\<^sup>+"
   by (induct rule: trancl_induct) (fast intro: r_r_into_trancl trancl_trans)+
 
-lemma tranclp_rtranclp_tranclp: "r\<^sup>+\<^sup>+ a b \<Longrightarrow> r\<^sup>*\<^sup>* b c \<Longrightarrow> r\<^sup>+\<^sup>+ a c"
-  apply (drule tranclpD)
-  apply (elim exE conjE)
-  apply (drule rtranclp_trans, assumption)
-  apply (drule (2) rtranclp_into_tranclp2)
-  done
+lemma tranclp_rtranclp_tranclp:
+  assumes "r\<^sup>+\<^sup>+ a b" "r\<^sup>*\<^sup>* b c" shows "r\<^sup>+\<^sup>+ a c"
+proof -
+  obtain z where "r a z" "r\<^sup>*\<^sup>* z c"
+    using assms by (iprover dest: tranclpD rtranclp_trans)
+  then show ?thesis
+    by (blast dest: rtranclp_into_tranclp2)
+qed
 
 lemma rtranclp_conversep: "r\<inverse>\<inverse>\<^sup>*\<^sup>* = r\<^sup>*\<^sup>*\<inverse>\<inverse>"
   by(auto simp add: fun_eq_iff intro: rtranclp_converseI rtranclp_converseD)
@@ -717,13 +724,13 @@
 
 lemma symclpI [simp, intro?]:
   shows symclpI1: "r x y \<Longrightarrow> symclp r x y"
-  and symclpI2: "r y x \<Longrightarrow> symclp r x y"
-by(simp_all add: symclp_def)
+    and symclpI2: "r y x \<Longrightarrow> symclp r x y"
+  by(simp_all add: symclp_def)
 
 lemma symclpE [consumes 1, cases pred]:
   assumes "symclp r x y"
   obtains (base) "r x y" | (sym) "r y x"
-using assms by(auto simp add: symclp_def)
+  using assms by(auto simp add: symclp_def)
 
 lemma symclp_pointfree: "symclp r = sup r r\<inverse>\<inverse>"
   by(auto simp add: symclp_def fun_eq_iff)
@@ -962,12 +969,10 @@
 
 lemma trancl_power: "p \<in> R\<^sup>+ \<longleftrightarrow> (\<exists>n > 0. p \<in> R ^^ n)"
 proof -
-  have "((a, b) \<in> R\<^sup>+) = (\<exists>n>0. (a, b) \<in> R ^^ n)" for a b
+  have "(a, b) \<in> R\<^sup>+ \<longleftrightarrow> (\<exists>n>0. (a, b) \<in> R ^^ n)" for a b
   proof safe
     show "(a, b) \<in> R\<^sup>+ \<Longrightarrow> \<exists>n>0. (a, b) \<in> R ^^ n"
-      apply (drule tranclD2)
-      apply (fastforce simp: rtrancl_is_UN_relpow relcomp_unfold)
-      done
+      by (fastforce simp: rtrancl_is_UN_relpow relcomp_unfold dest: tranclD2)
     show "(a, b) \<in> R\<^sup>+" if "n > 0" "(a, b) \<in> R ^^ n" for n
     proof (cases n)
       case (Suc m)
@@ -1117,17 +1122,23 @@
   fixes R :: "('a \<times> 'a) set"
   assumes "finite R"
   shows "R^^k \<subseteq> (\<Union>n\<in>{n. n \<le> card R}. R^^n)"
-  apply (cases k, force)
-  apply (use relpow_finite_bounded1[OF assms, of k] in auto)
-  done
+proof (cases k)
+  case (Suc k')
+  then show ?thesis
+    using relpow_finite_bounded1[OF assms, of k] by auto
+qed force
 
 lemma rtrancl_finite_eq_relpow: "finite R \<Longrightarrow> R\<^sup>* = (\<Union>n\<in>{n. n \<le> card R}. R^^n)"
   by (fastforce simp: rtrancl_power dest: relpow_finite_bounded)
 
-lemma trancl_finite_eq_relpow: "finite R \<Longrightarrow> R\<^sup>+ = (\<Union>n\<in>{n. 0 < n \<and> n \<le> card R}. R^^n)"
-  apply (auto simp: trancl_power)
-  apply (auto dest: relpow_finite_bounded1)
-  done
+lemma trancl_finite_eq_relpow:
+  assumes "finite R" shows "R\<^sup>+ = (\<Union>n\<in>{n. 0 < n \<and> n \<le> card R}. R^^n)"
+proof -
+  have "\<And>a b n. \<lbrakk>0 < n; (a, b) \<in> R ^^ n\<rbrakk> \<Longrightarrow> \<exists>x>0. x \<le> card R \<and> (a, b) \<in> R ^^ x"
+    using assms by (auto dest: relpow_finite_bounded1)
+  then show ?thesis
+    by (auto simp: trancl_power)
+qed
 
 lemma finite_relcomp[simp,intro]:
   assumes "finite R" and "finite S"
@@ -1189,7 +1200,7 @@
     show ?thesis
     proof (cases "i = 1")
       case True
-      from this \<open>(a, b) \<in> R ^^ i\<close> show ?thesis
+      with \<open>(a, b) \<in> R ^^ i\<close> show ?thesis
         by (auto simp: ntrancl_def)
     next
       case False