# HG changeset patch # User berghofe # Date 1189072131 -7200 # Node ID 452c4e02a684d71cf0e714232854094c87d66ee8 # Parent 57c7dfaa0153a99dc86df06c29053d5443bcedf3 New proof of standardization theorem (inspired by Ralph Matthes). diff -r 57c7dfaa0153 -r 452c4e02a684 src/HOL/Lambda/Standardization.thy --- /dev/null Thu Jan 01 00:00:00 1970 +0000 +++ b/src/HOL/Lambda/Standardization.thy Thu Sep 06 11:48:51 2007 +0200 @@ -0,0 +1,361 @@ +(* Title: HOL/Lambda/Standardization.thy + ID: $Id$ + Author: Stefan Berghofer + Copyright 2005 TU Muenchen +*) + +header {* Standardization *} + +theory Standardization +imports NormalForm +begin + +text {* +Based on lecture notes by Ralph Matthes \cite{Matthes-ESSLLI2000}, +original proof idea due to Ralph Loader \cite{Loader1998}. +*} + + +subsection {* Standard reduction relation *} + +declare listrel_mono [mono_set] + +inductive + sred :: "dB \ dB \ bool" (infixl "\\<^sub>s" 50) + and sredlist :: "dB list \ dB list \ bool" (infixl "[\\<^sub>s]" 50) +where + "s [\\<^sub>s] t \ listrelp op \\<^sub>s s t" +| Var: "rs [\\<^sub>s] rs' \ Var x \\ rs \\<^sub>s Var x \\ rs'" +| Abs: "r \\<^sub>s r' \ ss [\\<^sub>s] ss' \ Abs r \\ ss \\<^sub>s Abs r' \\ ss'" +| Beta: "r[s/0] \\ ss \\<^sub>s t \ Abs r \ s \\ ss \\<^sub>s t" + +lemma refl_listrelp: "\x\set xs. R x x \ listrelp R xs xs" + by (induct xs) (auto intro: listrelp.intros) + +lemma refl_sred: "t \\<^sub>s t" + by (induct t rule: Apps_dB_induct) (auto intro: refl_listrelp sred.intros) + +lemma refl_sreds: "ts [\\<^sub>s] ts" + by (simp add: refl_sred refl_listrelp) + +lemma listrelp_conj1: "listrelp (\x y. R x y \ S x y) x y \ listrelp R x y" + by (erule listrelp.induct) (auto intro: listrelp.intros) + +lemma listrelp_conj2: "listrelp (\x y. R x y \ S x y) x y \ listrelp S x y" + by (erule listrelp.induct) (auto intro: listrelp.intros) + +lemma listrelp_app: + assumes xsys: "listrelp R xs ys" + shows "listrelp R xs' ys' \ listrelp R (xs @ xs') (ys @ ys')" using xsys + by (induct arbitrary: xs' ys') (auto intro: listrelp.intros) + +lemma lemma1: + assumes r: "r \\<^sub>s r'" and s: "s \\<^sub>s s'" + shows "r \ s \\<^sub>s r' \ s'" using r +proof induct + case (Var rs rs' x) + then have "rs [\\<^sub>s] rs'" by (rule listrelp_conj1) + moreover have "[s] [\\<^sub>s] [s']" by (iprover intro: s listrelp.intros) + ultimately have "rs @ [s] [\\<^sub>s] rs' @ [s']" by (rule listrelp_app) + hence "Var x \\ (rs @ [s]) \\<^sub>s Var x \\ (rs' @ [s'])" by (rule sred.Var) + thus ?case by (simp only: app_last) +next + case (Abs r r' ss ss') + from Abs(3) have "ss [\\<^sub>s] ss'" by (rule listrelp_conj1) + moreover have "[s] [\\<^sub>s] [s']" by (iprover intro: s listrelp.intros) + ultimately have "ss @ [s] [\\<^sub>s] ss' @ [s']" by (rule listrelp_app) + with `r \\<^sub>s r'` have "Abs r \\ (ss @ [s]) \\<^sub>s Abs r' \\ (ss' @ [s'])" + by (rule sred.Abs) + thus ?case by (simp only: app_last) +next + case (Beta r u ss t) + hence "r[u/0] \\ (ss @ [s]) \\<^sub>s t \ s'" by (simp only: app_last) + hence "Abs r \ u \\ (ss @ [s]) \\<^sub>s t \ s'" by (rule sred.Beta) + thus ?case by (simp only: app_last) +qed + +lemma lemma1': + assumes ts: "ts [\\<^sub>s] ts'" + shows "r \\<^sub>s r' \ r \\ ts \\<^sub>s r' \\ ts'" using ts + by (induct arbitrary: r r') (auto intro: lemma1) + +lemma lemma2_1: + assumes beta: "t \\<^sub>\ u" + shows "t \\<^sub>s u" using beta +proof induct + case (beta s t) + have "Abs s \ t \\ [] \\<^sub>s s[t/0] \\ []" by (iprover intro: sred.Beta refl_sred) + thus ?case by simp +next + case (appL s t u) + thus ?case by (iprover intro: lemma1 refl_sred) +next + case (appR s t u) + thus ?case by (iprover intro: lemma1 refl_sred) +next + case (abs s t) + hence "Abs s \\ [] \\<^sub>s Abs t \\ []" by (iprover intro: sred.Abs listrelp.Nil) + thus ?case by simp +qed + +lemma listrelp_betas: + assumes ts: "listrelp op \\<^sub>\\<^sup>* ts ts'" + shows "\t t'. t \\<^sub>\\<^sup>* t' \ t \\ ts \\<^sub>\\<^sup>* t' \\ ts'" using ts + by induct auto + +lemma lemma2_2: + assumes t: "t \\<^sub>s u" + shows "t \\<^sub>\\<^sup>* u" using t + by induct (auto dest: listrelp_conj2 + intro: listrelp_betas apps_preserves_beta converse_rtranclp_into_rtranclp) + +lemma sred_lift: + assumes s: "s \\<^sub>s t" + shows "lift s i \\<^sub>s lift t i" using s +proof (induct arbitrary: i) + case (Var rs rs' x) + hence "map (\t. lift t i) rs [\\<^sub>s] map (\t. lift t i) rs'" + by induct (auto intro: listrelp.intros) + thus ?case by (cases "x < i") (auto intro: sred.Var) +next + case (Abs r r' ss ss') + from Abs(3) have "map (\t. lift t i) ss [\\<^sub>s] map (\t. lift t i) ss'" + by induct (auto intro: listrelp.intros) + thus ?case by (auto intro: sred.Abs Abs) +next + case (Beta r s ss t) + thus ?case by (auto intro: sred.Beta) +qed + +lemma lemma3: + assumes r: "r \\<^sub>s r'" + shows "s \\<^sub>s s' \ r[s/x] \\<^sub>s r'[s'/x]" using r +proof (induct arbitrary: s s' x) + case (Var rs rs' y) + hence "map (\t. t[s/x]) rs [\\<^sub>s] map (\t. t[s'/x]) rs'" + by induct (auto intro: listrelp.intros Var) + moreover have "Var y[s/x] \\<^sub>s Var y[s'/x]" + proof (cases "y < x") + case True thus ?thesis by simp (rule refl_sred) + next + case False + thus ?thesis + by (cases "y = x") (auto simp add: Var intro: refl_sred) + qed + ultimately show ?case by simp (rule lemma1') +next + case (Abs r r' ss ss') + have "lift s 0 \\<^sub>s lift s' 0" by (rule sred_lift) + hence "r[lift s 0/Suc x] \\<^sub>s r'[lift s' 0/Suc x]" by (fast intro: Abs) + moreover from Abs(3) have "map (\t. t[s/x]) ss [\\<^sub>s] map (\t. t[s'/x]) ss'" + by induct (auto intro: listrelp.intros Abs) + ultimately show ?case by simp (rule sred.Abs) +next + case (Beta r u ss t) + thus ?case by (auto simp add: subst_subst intro: sred.Beta) +qed + +lemma lemma4_aux: + assumes rs: "listrelp (\t u. t \\<^sub>s u \ (\r. u \\<^sub>\ r \ t \\<^sub>s r)) rs rs'" + shows "rs' => ss \ rs [\\<^sub>s] ss" using rs +proof (induct arbitrary: ss) + case Nil + thus ?case by cases (auto intro: listrelp.Nil) +next + case (Cons x y xs ys) + note Cons' = Cons + show ?case + proof (cases ss) + case Nil with Cons show ?thesis by simp + next + case (Cons y' ys') + hence ss: "ss = y' # ys'" by simp + from Cons Cons' have "y \\<^sub>\ y' \ ys' = ys \ y' = y \ ys => ys'" by simp + hence "x # xs [\\<^sub>s] y' # ys'" + proof + assume H: "y \\<^sub>\ y' \ ys' = ys" + with Cons' have "x \\<^sub>s y'" by blast + moreover from Cons' have "xs [\\<^sub>s] ys" by (iprover dest: listrelp_conj1) + ultimately have "x # xs [\\<^sub>s] y' # ys" by (rule listrelp.Cons) + with H show ?thesis by simp + next + assume H: "y' = y \ ys => ys'" + with Cons' have "x \\<^sub>s y'" by blast + moreover from H have "xs [\\<^sub>s] ys'" by (blast intro: Cons') + ultimately show ?thesis by (rule listrelp.Cons) + qed + with ss show ?thesis by simp + qed +qed + +lemma lemma4: + assumes r: "r \\<^sub>s r'" + shows "r' \\<^sub>\ r'' \ r \\<^sub>s r''" using r +proof (induct arbitrary: r'') + case (Var rs rs' x) + then obtain ss where rs: "rs' => ss" and r'': "r'' = Var x \\ ss" + by (blast dest: head_Var_reduction) + from Var(1) rs have "rs [\\<^sub>s] ss" by (rule lemma4_aux) + hence "Var x \\ rs \\<^sub>s Var x \\ ss" by (rule sred.Var) + with r'' show ?case by simp +next + case (Abs r r' ss ss') + from `Abs r' \\ ss' \\<^sub>\ r''` show ?case + proof + fix s + assume r'': "r'' = s \\ ss'" + assume "Abs r' \\<^sub>\ s" + then obtain r''' where s: "s = Abs r'''" and r''': "r' \\<^sub>\ r'''" by cases auto + from r''' have "r \\<^sub>s r'''" by (blast intro: Abs) + moreover from Abs have "ss [\\<^sub>s] ss'" by (iprover dest: listrelp_conj1) + ultimately have "Abs r \\ ss \\<^sub>s Abs r''' \\ ss'" by (rule sred.Abs) + with r'' s show "Abs r \\ ss \\<^sub>s r''" by simp + next + fix rs' + assume "ss' => rs'" + with Abs(3) have "ss [\\<^sub>s] rs'" by (rule lemma4_aux) + with `r \\<^sub>s r'` have "Abs r \\ ss \\<^sub>s Abs r' \\ rs'" by (rule sred.Abs) + moreover assume "r'' = Abs r' \\ rs'" + ultimately show "Abs r \\ ss \\<^sub>s r''" by simp + next + fix t u' us' + assume "ss' = u' # us'" + with Abs(3) obtain u us where + ss: "ss = u # us" and u: "u \\<^sub>s u'" and us: "us [\\<^sub>s] us'" + by cases (auto dest!: listrelp_conj1) + have "r[u/0] \\<^sub>s r'[u'/0]" by (rule lemma3) + with us have "r[u/0] \\ us \\<^sub>s r'[u'/0] \\ us'" by (rule lemma1') + hence "Abs r \ u \\ us \\<^sub>s r'[u'/0] \\ us'" by (rule sred.Beta) + moreover assume "Abs r' = Abs t" and "r'' = t[u'/0] \\ us'" + ultimately show "Abs r \\ ss \\<^sub>s r''" using ss by simp + qed +next + case (Beta r s ss t) + show ?case + by (rule sred.Beta) (rule Beta)+ +qed + +lemma rtrancl_beta_sred: + assumes r: "r \\<^sub>\\<^sup>* r'" + shows "r \\<^sub>s r'" using r + by induct (iprover intro: refl_sred lemma4)+ + + +subsection {* Leftmost reduction and weakly normalizing terms *} + +inductive + lred :: "dB \ dB \ bool" (infixl "\\<^sub>l" 50) + and lredlist :: "dB list \ dB list \ bool" (infixl "[\\<^sub>l]" 50) +where + "s [\\<^sub>l] t \ listrelp op \\<^sub>l s t" +| Var: "rs [\\<^sub>l] rs' \ Var x \\ rs \\<^sub>l Var x \\ rs'" +| Abs: "r \\<^sub>l r' \ Abs r \\<^sub>l Abs r'" +| Beta: "r[s/0] \\ ss \\<^sub>l t \ Abs r \ s \\ ss \\<^sub>l t" + +lemma lred_imp_sred: + assumes lred: "s \\<^sub>l t" + shows "s \\<^sub>s t" using lred +proof induct + case (Var rs rs' x) + then have "rs [\\<^sub>s] rs'" + by induct (iprover intro: listrelp.intros)+ + then show ?case by (rule sred.Var) +next + case (Abs r r') + from `r \\<^sub>s r'` + have "Abs r \\ [] \\<^sub>s Abs r' \\ []" using listrelp.Nil + by (rule sred.Abs) + then show ?case by simp +next + case (Beta r s ss t) + from `r[s/0] \\ ss \\<^sub>s t` + show ?case by (rule sred.Beta) +qed + +inductive WN :: "dB => bool" + where + Var: "listsp WN rs \ WN (Var n \\ rs)" + | Lambda: "WN r \ WN (Abs r)" + | Beta: "WN ((r[s/0]) \\ ss) \ WN ((Abs r \ s) \\ ss)" + +lemma listrelp_imp_listsp1: + assumes H: "listrelp (\x y. P x) xs ys" + shows "listsp P xs" using H + by induct auto + +lemma listrelp_imp_listsp2: + assumes H: "listrelp (\x y. P y) xs ys" + shows "listsp P ys" using H + by induct auto + +lemma lemma5: + assumes lred: "r \\<^sub>l r'" + shows "WN r" and "NF r'" using lred + by induct + (iprover dest: listrelp_conj1 listrelp_conj2 + listrelp_imp_listsp1 listrelp_imp_listsp2 intro: WN.intros + NF.intros [simplified listall_listsp_eq])+ + +lemma lemma6: + assumes wn: "WN r" + shows "\r'. r \\<^sub>l r'" using wn +proof induct + case (Var rs n) + then have "\rs'. rs [\\<^sub>l] rs'" + by induct (iprover intro: listrelp.intros)+ + then show ?case by (iprover intro: lred.Var) +qed (iprover intro: lred.intros)+ + +lemma lemma7: + assumes r: "r \\<^sub>s r'" + shows "NF r' \ r \\<^sub>l r'" using r +proof induct + case (Var rs rs' x) + from `NF (Var x \\ rs')` have "listall NF rs'" + by cases simp_all + with Var(1) have "rs [\\<^sub>l] rs'" + proof induct + case Nil + show ?case by (rule listrelp.Nil) + next + case (Cons x y xs ys) + hence "x \\<^sub>l y" and "xs [\\<^sub>l] ys" by simp_all + thus ?case by (rule listrelp.Cons) + qed + thus ?case by (rule lred.Var) +next + case (Abs r r' ss ss') + from `NF (Abs r' \\ ss')` + have ss': "ss' = []" by (rule Abs_NF) + from Abs(3) have ss: "ss = []" using ss' + by cases simp_all + from ss' Abs have "NF (Abs r')" by simp + hence "NF r'" by cases simp_all + with Abs have "r \\<^sub>l r'" by simp + hence "Abs r \\<^sub>l Abs r'" by (rule lred.Abs) + with ss ss' show ?case by simp +next + case (Beta r s ss t) + hence "r[s/0] \\ ss \\<^sub>l t" by simp + thus ?case by (rule lred.Beta) +qed + +lemma WN_eq: "WN t = (\t'. t \\<^sub>\\<^sup>* t' \ NF t')" +proof + assume "WN t" + then have "\t'. t \\<^sub>l t'" by (rule lemma6) + then obtain t' where t': "t \\<^sub>l t'" .. + then have NF: "NF t'" by (rule lemma5) + from t' have "t \\<^sub>s t'" by (rule lred_imp_sred) + then have "t \\<^sub>\\<^sup>* t'" by (rule lemma2_2) + with NF show "\t'. t \\<^sub>\\<^sup>* t' \ NF t'" by iprover +next + assume "\t'. t \\<^sub>\\<^sup>* t' \ NF t'" + then obtain t' where t': "t \\<^sub>\\<^sup>* t'" and NF: "NF t'" + by iprover + from t' have "t \\<^sub>s t'" by (rule rtrancl_beta_sred) + then have "t \\<^sub>l t'" using NF by (rule lemma7) + then show "WN t" by (rule lemma5) +qed + +end