(* Title: HOL/UNITY/Union.thy Author: Lawrence C Paulson, Cambridge University Computer Laboratory Copyright 1998 University of Cambridge Partly from Misra's Chapter 5: Asynchronous Compositions of Programs. *)
section‹Unions of Programs›
theory Union imports SubstAx FP begin
(*FIXME: conjoin Init F \<inter> Init G \<noteq> {} *) definition
ok :: "['a program, 'a program] => bool" (infixl‹ok› 65) where"F ok G == Acts F ⊆ AllowedActs G & Acts G ⊆ AllowedActs F"
(*FIXME: conjoin (\<Inter>i \<in> I. Init (F i)) \<noteq> {} *) definition
OK :: "['a set, 'a => 'b program] => bool" where"OK I F = (∀i ∈ I. ∀j ∈ I-{i}. Acts (F i) ⊆ AllowedActs (F j))"
definition
JOIN :: "['a set, 'a => 'b program] => 'b program" where"JOIN I F = mk_program (∩i ∈ I. Init (F i), ∪i ∈ I. Acts (F i), ∩i ∈ I. AllowedActs (F i))"
definition
Join :: "['a program, 'a program] => 'a program" (infixl‹⊔› 65) where"F ⊔ G = mk_program (Init F ∩ Init G, Acts F ∪ Acts G, AllowedActs F ∩ AllowedActs G)"
(*Characterizes safety properties. Used with specifying Allowed*) definition
safety_prop :: "'a program set => bool" where"safety_prop X ⟷ SKIP ∈ X ∧ (∀G. Acts G ⊆∪(Acts ` X) ⟶ G ∈ X)"
(*Join is an AC-operator*) lemmas Join_ac = Join_assoc Join_left_absorb Join_commute Join_left_commute
subsection‹Laws Governing ‹⊔›\ (*Also follows by JN_insert and insert_absorb, but the proof is longer*) lemma JN_absorb: "k ∈ I ==> F k⊔(⊔i ∈ I. F i) = (⊔i ∈ I. F i)" by (auto intro!: program_equalityI)
lemma JN_Un: "(⊔i ∈ I ∪ J. F i) = ((⊔i ∈ I. F i)⊔(⊔i ∈ J. F i))" by (auto intro!: program_equalityI)
lemma JN_constant: "(⊔i ∈ I. c) = (if I={} then SKIP else c)" by (rule program_equalityI, auto)
lemma JN_Join_distrib: "(⊔i ∈ I. F i⊔G i) = (⊔i ∈ I. F i) ⊔ (⊔i ∈ I. G i)" by (auto intro!: program_equalityI)
lemma JN_Join_miniscope: "i ∈ I ==> (⊔i ∈ I. F i⊔G) = ((⊔i ∈ I. F i)⊔G)" by (auto simp add: JN_Join_distrib JN_constant)
(*Used to prove guarantees_JN_I*) lemma JN_Join_diff: "i ∈ I ==> F i⊔JOIN (I - {i}) F = JOIN I F" apply (unfold JOIN_def Join_def) apply (rule program_equalityI, auto) done
subsection‹Safety: co, stable, FP›
(*Fails if I={} because it collapses to SKIP \<in> A co B, i.e. to A \<subseteq> B. So an alternative precondition is A ⊆ B, but most proofs using this rule require I to be nonempty for other reasons anyway.*) lemma JN_constrains: "i ∈ I ==> (⊔i ∈ I. F i) ∈ A co B = (∀i ∈ I. F i ∈ A co B)" by (simp add: constrains_def JOIN_def, blast)
lemma Join_constrains [simp]: "(F⊔G ∈ A co B) = (F ∈ A co B & G ∈ A co B)" by (auto simp add: constrains_def Join_def)
lemma Join_unless [simp]: "(F⊔G ∈ A unless B) = (F ∈ A unless B & G ∈ A unless B)" by (simp add: unless_def)
(*Analogous weak versions FAIL; see Misra [1994] 5.4.1, Substitution Axiom. reachable (F⊔G) could be much bigger than reachable F, reachable G *)
lemma Join_constrains_weaken: "[| F ∈ A co A'; G ∈ B co B' |] ==> F⊔G ∈ (A ∩ B) co (A' ∪ B')" by (simp, blast intro: constrains_weaken)
(*If I={}, it degenerates to SKIP \<in> UNIV co {}, which is false.*) lemma JN_constrains_weaken: "[| ∀i ∈ I. F i ∈ A i co A' i; i ∈ I |] ==> (⊔i ∈ I. F i) ∈ (∩i ∈ I. A i) co (∪i ∈ I. A' i)" apply (simp (no_asm_simp) add: JN_constrains) apply (blast intro: constrains_weaken) done
lemma JN_stable: "(⊔i ∈ I. F i) ∈ stable A = (∀i ∈ I. F i ∈ stable A)" by (simp add: stable_def constrains_def JOIN_def)
lemma invariant_JN_I: "[| !!i. i ∈ I ==> F i ∈ invariant A; i ∈ I |] ==> (⊔i ∈ I. F i) ∈ invariant A" by (simp add: invariant_def JN_stable, blast)
lemma Join_stable [simp]: "(F⊔G ∈ stable A) = (F ∈ stable A & G ∈ stable A)" by (simp add: stable_def)
lemma Join_increasing [simp]: "(F⊔G ∈ increasing f) = (F ∈ increasing f & G ∈ increasing f)" by (auto simp add: increasing_def)
lemma invariant_JoinI: "[| F ∈ invariant A; G ∈ invariant A |] ==> F⊔G ∈ invariant A" by (auto simp add: invariant_def)
lemma FP_JN: "FP (⊔i ∈ I. F i) = (∩i ∈ I. FP (F i))" by (simp add: FP_def JN_stable INTER_eq)
subsection‹Progress: transient, ensures›
lemma JN_transient: "i ∈ I ==> (⊔i ∈ I. F i) ∈ transient A = (∃i ∈ I. F i ∈ transient A)" by (auto simp add: transient_def JOIN_def)
lemma Join_transient [simp]: "F⊔G ∈ transient A = (F ∈ transient A | G ∈ transient A)" by (auto simp add: bex_Un transient_def Join_def)
lemma Join_transient_I1: "F ∈ transient A ==> F⊔G ∈ transient A" by simp
lemma Join_transient_I2: "G ∈ transient A ==> F⊔G ∈ transient A" by simp
(*If I={} it degenerates to (SKIP \<in> A ensures B) = False, i.e. to ~(A \<subseteq> B) *) lemma JN_ensures: "i ∈ I ==> (⊔i ∈ I. F i) ∈ A ensures B = ((∀i ∈ I. F i ∈ (A-B) co (A ∪ B)) & (∃i ∈ I. F i ∈ A ensures B))" by (auto simp add: ensures_def JN_constrains JN_transient)
lemma Join_ensures: "F⊔G ∈ A ensures B = (F ∈ (A-B) co (A ∪ B) & G ∈ (A-B) co (A ∪ B) & (F ∈ transient (A-B) | G ∈ transient (A-B)))" by (auto simp add: ensures_def)
lemma stable_Join_constrains: "[| F ∈ stable A; G ∈ A co A' |] ==> F⊔G ∈ A co A'" apply (unfold stable_def constrains_def Join_def) apply (simp add: ball_Un, blast) done
(*Premise for G cannot use Always because F \<in> Stable A is weaker than G \<in> stable A *) lemma stable_Join_Always1: "[| F ∈ stable A; G ∈ invariant A |] ==> F⊔G ∈ Always A" apply (simp (no_asm_use) add: Always_def invariant_def Stable_eq_stable) apply (force intro: stable_Int) done
(*As above, but exchanging the roles of F and G*) lemma stable_Join_Always2: "[| F ∈ invariant A; G ∈ stable A |] ==> F⊔G ∈ Always A" apply (subst Join_commute) apply (blast intro: stable_Join_Always1) done
lemma stable_Join_ensures1: "[| F ∈ stable A; G ∈ A ensures B |] ==> F⊔G ∈ A ensures B" apply (simp (no_asm_simp) add: Join_ensures) apply (simp add: stable_def ensures_def) apply (erule constrains_weaken, auto) done
(*As above, but exchanging the roles of F and G*) lemma stable_Join_ensures2: "[| F ∈ A ensures B; G ∈ stable A |] ==> F⊔G ∈ A ensures B" apply (subst Join_commute) apply (blast intro: stable_Join_ensures1) done
subsection‹the ok and OK relations›
lemma ok_SKIP1 [iff]: "SKIP ok F" by (simp add: ok_def)
lemma ok_SKIP2 [iff]: "F ok SKIP" by (simp add: ok_def)
lemma ok_Join_commute: "(F ok G & (F⊔G) ok H) = (G ok H & F ok (G⊔H))" by (auto simp add: ok_def)
lemma ok_commute: "(F ok G) = (G ok F)" by (auto simp add: ok_def)
lemmas ok_sym = ok_commute [THEN iffD1]
lemma ok_iff_OK: "OK {(0::int,F),(1,G),(2,H)} snd = (F ok G & (F⊔G) ok H)" apply (simp add: Ball_def conj_disj_distribR ok_def Join_def OK_def insert_absorb
all_conj_distrib) apply blast done
lemma ok_Join_iff1 [iff]: "F ok (G⊔H) = (F ok G & F ok H)" by (auto simp add: ok_def)
lemma ok_Join_iff2 [iff]: "(G⊔H) ok F = (G ok F & H ok F)" by (auto simp add: ok_def)
(*useful? Not with the previous two around*) lemma ok_Join_commute_I: "[| F ok G; (F⊔G) ok H |] ==> F ok (G⊔H)" by (auto simp add: ok_def)
lemma ok_JN_iff1 [iff]: "F ok (JOIN I G) = (∀i ∈ I. F ok G i)" by (auto simp add: ok_def)
lemma ok_JN_iff2 [iff]: "(JOIN I G) ok F = (∀i ∈ I. G i ok F)" by (auto simp add: ok_def)
lemma OK_iff_ok: "OK I F = (∀i ∈ I. ∀j ∈ I-{i}. (F i) ok (F j))" by (auto simp add: ok_def OK_def)
lemma OK_imp_ok: "[| OK I F; i ∈ I; j ∈ I; i ≠ j|] ==> (F i) ok (F j)" by (auto simp add: OK_iff_ok)
lemma Allowed_eq: "safety_prop X ==> Allowed (mk_program (init, acts, ∪(Acts ` X))) = X" by (simp add: Allowed_def safety_prop_Acts_iff)
(*For safety_prop to hold, the property must be satisfiable!*) lemma safety_prop_constrains [iff]: "safety_prop (A co B) = (A ⊆ B)" by (simp add: safety_prop_def constrains_def, blast)
lemma safety_prop_stable [iff]: "safety_prop (stable A)" by (simp add: stable_def)
lemma safety_prop_Int [simp]: "safety_prop X ==> safety_prop Y ==> safety_prop (X ∩ Y)" proof (clarsimp simp add: safety_prop_def) fix G assume"∀G. Acts G ⊆ (∪x∈X. Acts x) ⟶ G ∈ X" thenhave X: "Acts G ⊆ (∪x∈X. Acts x) ==> G ∈ X"by blast assume"∀G. Acts G ⊆ (∪x∈Y. Acts x) ⟶ G ∈ Y" thenhave Y: "Acts G ⊆ (∪x∈Y. Acts x) ==> G ∈ Y"by blast assume Acts: "Acts G ⊆ (∪x∈X ∩ Y. Acts x)" with X and Y show"G ∈ X ∧ G ∈ Y"by auto qed
lemma safety_prop_INTER [simp]: "(∧i. i ∈ I ==> safety_prop (X i)) ==> safety_prop (∩i∈I. X i)" proof (clarsimp simp add: safety_prop_def) fix G and i assume"∧i. i ∈ I ==>⊥∈ X i ∧ (∀G. Acts G ⊆ (∪x∈X i. Acts x) ⟶ G ∈ X i)" thenhave *: "i ∈ I ==> Acts G ⊆ (∪x∈X i. Acts x) ==> G ∈ X i" by blast assume"i ∈ I" moreoverassume"Acts G ⊆ (∪j∈∩i∈I. X i. Acts j)" ultimatelyhave"Acts G ⊆ (∪i∈X i. Acts i)" by auto with * ‹i ∈ I›show"G ∈ X i"by blast qed
lemma safety_prop_INTER1 [simp]: "(∧i. safety_prop (X i)) ==> safety_prop (∩i. X i)" by (rule safety_prop_INTER) simp
lemma def_prg_Allowed: "[| F == mk_program (init, acts, ∪(Acts ` X)) ; safety_prop X |] ==> Allowed F = X" by (simp add: Allowed_eq)
lemma def_total_prg_Allowed: "[| F = mk_total_program (init, acts, ∪(Acts ` X)) ; safety_prop X |] ==> Allowed F = X" by (simp add: mk_total_program_def def_prg_Allowed)
lemma def_UNION_ok_iff: "[| F = mk_program(init,acts,∪(Acts ` X)); safety_prop X |] ==> F ok G = (G ∈ X & acts ⊆ AllowedActs G)" by (auto simp add: ok_def safety_prop_Acts_iff)
text‹The union of two total programs is total.› lemma totalize_Join: "totalize F⊔totalize G = totalize (F⊔G)" by (simp add: program_equalityI totalize_def Join_def image_Un)
Die Informationen auf dieser Webseite wurden
nach bestem Wissen sorgfältig zusammengestellt. Es wird jedoch weder Vollständigkeit, noch Richtigkeit,
noch Qualität der bereit gestellten Informationen zugesichert.
Bemerkung:
Die farbliche Syntaxdarstellung und die Messung sind noch experimentell.