1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311
|
<html>
<head><title>EQUIVALENCE.html -- ACL2 Version 3.1</title></head>
<body text=#000000 bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<h2>EQUIVALENCE</h2>mark a relation as an equivalence relation
<pre>Major Section: <a href="RULE-CLASSES.html">RULE-CLASSES</a>
</pre><p>
See <a href="RULE-CLASSES.html">rule-classes</a> for a general discussion of rule classes and
how they are used to build rules from formulas. An example
<code>:</code><code><a href="COROLLARY.html">corollary</a></code> formula from which a <code>:equivalence</code> rule might be built is
as follows. (We assume that <code>r-equal</code> has been defined.)
<pre>
Example:
(and (booleanp (r-equal x y))
(r-equal x x)
(implies (r-equal x y) (r-equal y x))
(implies (and (r-equal x y)
(r-equal y z))
(r-equal x z))).
</pre>
Also see <a href="DEFEQUIV.html">defequiv</a>.
<p>
<pre>
General Form:
(and (booleanp (equiv x y))
(equiv x x)
(implies (equiv x y) (equiv y x))
(implies (and (equiv x y)
(equiv y z))
(equiv x z)))
</pre>
except that the order of the conjuncts and terms and the choice of
variable symbols is unimportant. The effect of such a rule is to
identify <code>equiv</code> as an equivalence relation. Note that only Boolean
2-place function symbols can be treated as equivalence relations.
See <a href="CONGRUENCE.html">congruence</a> and see <a href="REFINEMENT.html">refinement</a> for closely related
concepts.<p>
The macro form <code>(defequiv equiv)</code> is an abbreviation for a <code><a href="DEFTHM.html">defthm</a></code> of
rule-class <code>:equivalence</code> that establishes that <code>equiv</code> is an
equivalence relation. It generates the formula shown above.
See <a href="DEFEQUIV.html">defequiv</a>.<p>
When <code>equiv</code> is marked as an equivalence relation, its reflexivity,
symmetry, and transitivity are built into the system in a deeper way
than via <code>:</code><code><a href="REWRITE.html">rewrite</a></code> rules. More importantly, after <code>equiv</code> has been
shown to be an equivalence relation, lemmas about <code>equiv</code>, e.g.,
<pre>
(implies hyps (equiv lhs rhs)),
</pre>
when stored as <code>:</code><code><a href="REWRITE.html">rewrite</a></code> rules, cause the system to rewrite certain
occurrences of (instances of) <code>lhs</code> to (instances of) <code>rhs</code>. Roughly
speaking, an occurrence of <code>lhs</code> in the <code>kth</code> argument of some
<code>fn</code>-expression, <code>(fn ... lhs' ...)</code>, can be rewritten to produce
<code>(fn ... rhs' ...)</code>, provided the system ``knows'' that the value
of <code>fn</code> is unaffected by <code>equiv</code>-substitution in the <code>kth</code>
argument. Such knowledge is communicated to the system via
``congruence lemmas.''<p>
For example, suppose that <code>r-equal</code> is known to be an equivalence
relation. The <code>:</code><code><a href="CONGRUENCE.html">congruence</a></code> lemma
<pre>
(implies (r-equal s1 s2)
(equal (fn s1 n) (fn s2 n)))
</pre>
informs the rewriter that, while rewriting the first argument of
<code>fn</code>-expressions, it is permitted to use <code>r-equal</code> rewrite-rules.
See <a href="CONGRUENCE.html">congruence</a> for details about <code>:</code><code><a href="CONGRUENCE.html">congruence</a></code> lemmas.
Interestingly, congruence lemmas are automatically created when an
equivalence relation is stored, saying that either of the
equivalence relation's arguments may be replaced by an equivalent
argument. That is, if the equivalence relation is <code>fn</code>, we store
congruence rules that state the following fact:
<pre>
(implies (and (fn x1 y1)
(fn x2 y2))
(iff (fn x1 x2) (fn y1 y2)))
</pre>
Another aspect of equivalence relations is that of ``refinement.''
We say <code>equiv1</code> ``refines'' <code>equiv2</code> iff <code>(equiv1 x y)</code> implies
<code>(equiv2 x y)</code>. <code>:</code><code><a href="REFINEMENT.html">refinement</a></code> rules permit you to establish such
connections between your equivalence relations. The value of
refinements is that if the system is trying to rewrite something
while maintaining <code>equiv2</code> it is permitted to use as a <code>:</code><code><a href="REWRITE.html">rewrite</a></code>
rule any refinement of <code>equiv2</code>. Thus, if <code>equiv1</code> is a
refinement of <code>equiv2</code> and there are <code>equiv1</code> rewrite-rules
available, they can be brought to bear while maintaining <code>equiv2</code>.
See <a href="REFINEMENT.html">refinement</a>.<p>
The system initially has knowledge of two equivalence relations,
equality, denoted by the symbol <code><a href="EQUAL.html">equal</a></code>, and propositional
equivalence, denoted by <code><a href="IFF.html">iff</a></code>. <code><a href="EQUAL.html">Equal</a></code> is known to be a refinement of
all equivalence relations and to preserve equality across all
arguments of all functions.<p>
Typically there are five steps involved in introducing and using a
new equivalence relation, equiv.
<blockquote><p>
(1) Define <code>equiv</code>,<p>
(2) prove the <code>:equivalence</code> lemma about <code>equiv</code>,<p>
(3) prove the <code>:</code><code><a href="CONGRUENCE.html">congruence</a></code> lemmas that show where <code>equiv</code> can be used
to maintain known relations,<p>
(4) prove the <code>:</code><code><a href="REFINEMENT.html">refinement</a></code> lemmas that relate <code>equiv</code> to known
relations other than equal, and<p>
(5) develop the theory of conditional <code>:</code><code><a href="REWRITE.html">rewrite</a></code> rules that drive
equiv rewriting.<p>
</blockquote>
More will be written about this as we develop the techniques. For
now, here is an example that shows how to make use of equivalence
relations in rewriting.<p>
Among the theorems proved below is
<pre>
(defthm insert-sort-is-id
(perm (insert-sort x) x))
</pre>
Here <code>perm</code> is defined as usual with <code>delete</code> and is proved to be an
equivalence relation and to be a congruence relation for <code><a href="CONS.html">cons</a></code> and
<code><a href="MEMBER.html">member</a></code>.<p>
Then we prove the lemma
<pre>
(defthm insert-is-cons
(perm (insert a x) (cons a x)))
</pre>
which you must think of as you would <code>(insert a x) = (cons a x)</code>.<p>
Now prove <code>(perm (insert-sort x) x)</code>. The base case is trivial. The
induction step is
<pre>
(consp x)
& (perm (insert-sort (cdr x)) (cdr x))<p>
-> (perm (insert-sort x) x).
</pre>
Opening <code>insert-sort</code> makes the conclusion be
<pre>
(perm (insert (car x) (insert-sort (cdr x))) x).
</pre>
Then apply the induction hypothesis (rewriting <code>(insert-sort (cdr x))</code>
to <code>(cdr x)</code>), to make the conclusion be
<pre>
(perm (insert (car x) (cdr x)) x)
</pre>
Then apply <code>insert-is-cons</code> to get <code>(perm (cons (car x) (cdr x)) x)</code>.
But we know that <code>(cons (car x) (cdr x))</code> is <code>x</code>, so we get <code>(perm x x)</code>
which is trivial, since <code>perm</code> is an equivalence relation.<p>
Here are the events.
<pre>
(encapsulate (((lt * *) => *))
(local (defun lt (x y) (declare (ignore x y)) nil))
(defthm lt-non-symmetric (implies (lt x y) (not (lt y x)))))<p>
(defun insert (x lst)
(cond ((atom lst) (list x))
((lt x (car lst)) (cons x lst))
(t (cons (car lst) (insert x (cdr lst))))))<p>
(defun insert-sort (lst)
(cond ((atom lst) nil)
(t (insert (car lst) (insert-sort (cdr lst))))))<p>
(defun del (x lst)
(cond ((atom lst) nil)
((equal x (car lst)) (cdr lst))
(t (cons (car lst) (del x (cdr lst))))))<p>
(defun mem (x lst)
(cond ((atom lst) nil)
((equal x (car lst)) t)
(t (mem x (cdr lst)))))<p>
(defun perm (lst1 lst2)
(cond ((atom lst1) (atom lst2))
((mem (car lst1) lst2)
(perm (cdr lst1) (del (car lst1) lst2)))
(t nil)))<p>
(defthm perm-reflexive
(perm x x))<p>
(defthm perm-cons
(implies (mem a x)
(equal (perm x (cons a y))
(perm (del a x) y)))
:hints (("Goal" :induct (perm x y))))<p>
(defthm perm-symmetric
(implies (perm x y) (perm y x)))<p>
(defthm mem-del
(implies (mem a (del b x)) (mem a x)))<p>
(defthm perm-mem
(implies (and (perm x y)
(mem a x))
(mem a y)))<p>
(defthm mem-del2
(implies (and (mem a x)
(not (equal a b)))
(mem a (del b x))))<p>
(defthm comm-del
(equal (del a (del b x)) (del b (del a x))))<p>
(defthm perm-del
(implies (perm x y)
(perm (del a x) (del a y))))<p>
(defthm perm-transitive
(implies (and (perm x y) (perm y z)) (perm x z)))<p>
(defequiv perm)<p>
(in-theory (disable perm
perm-reflexive
perm-symmetric
perm-transitive))<p>
(defcong perm perm (cons x y) 2)<p>
(defcong perm iff (mem x y) 2)<p>
(defthm atom-perm
(implies (not (consp x)) (perm x nil))
:rule-classes :forward-chaining
:hints (("Goal" :in-theory (enable perm))))<p>
(defthm insert-is-cons
(perm (insert a x) (cons a x)))<p>
(defthm insert-sort-is-id
(perm (insert-sort x) x))<p>
(defun app (x y) (if (consp x) (cons (car x) (app (cdr x) y)) y))<p>
(defun rev (x)
(if (consp x) (app (rev (cdr x)) (list (car x))) nil))<p>
(defcong perm perm (app x y) 2)<p>
(defthm app-cons
(perm (app a (cons b c)) (cons b (app a c))))<p>
(defthm app-commutes
(perm (app a b) (app b a)))<p>
(defcong perm perm (app x y) 1
:hints (("Goal" :induct (app y x))))<p>
(defthm rev-is-id (perm (rev x) x))<p>
(defun == (x y)
(if (consp x)
(if (consp y)
(and (equal (car x) (car y))
(== (cdr x) (cdr y)))
nil)
(not (consp y))))<p>
(defthm ==-reflexive (== x x))<p>
(defthm ==-symmetric (implies (== x y) (== y x)))<p>
(defequiv ==)<p>
(in-theory (disable ==-symmetric ==-reflexive))<p>
(defcong == == (cons x y) 2)<p>
(defcong == iff (consp x) 1)<p>
(defcong == == (app x y) 2)<p>
(defcong == == (app x y) 1)<p>
(defthm rev-rev (== (rev (rev x)) x))
</pre>
<br><br><br><a href="acl2-doc.html"><img src="llogo.gif"></a> <a href="acl2-doc-index.html"><img src="index.gif"></a>
</body>
</html>
|