(* Title: ZF/Cardinal_AC.thy Author: Lawrence C Paulson, Cambridge University Computer Laboratory Copyright 1994 University of Cambridge These results help justify infinite-branching datatypes *)
section‹Cardinal Arithmetic Using AC›
theory Cardinal_AC imports CardinalArith Zorn begin
subsection‹Strengthened Forms of Existing Theorems on Cardinals›
lemma cardinal_lt_iff_lesspoll: assumes i: "Ord(i)"shows"i < |A| ⟷ i ≺ A" proof assume"i < |A|" hence"i ≺ |A|" by (blast intro: lt_Card_imp_lesspoll Card_cardinal) alsohave"... ≈ A" by (rule cardinal_eqpoll) finallyshow"i ≺ A" . next assume"i ≺ A" alsohave"... ≈ |A|" by (blast intro: cardinal_eqpoll eqpoll_sym) finallyhave"i ≺ |A|" . thus"i < |A|"using i by (force intro: cardinal_lt_imp_lt lesspoll_cardinal_lt) qed
lemma cardinal_le_imp_lepoll: " i ≤ |A| ==> i < A" by (blast intro: lt_Ord Card_le_imp_lepoll Ord_cardinal_le le_trans)
subsection‹Other Applications of AC›
lemma surj_implies_inj: assumes f: "f ∈ surj(X,Y)"shows"∃g. g ∈ inj(Y,X)" proof - from f AC_Pi [of Y "λy. f-``{y}"] obtain z where z: "z ∈ (∏y∈Y. f -`` {y})" by (auto simp add: surj_def) (fast dest: apply_Pair) show ?thesis proof show"z ∈ inj(Y, X)"using z surj_is_fun [OF f] by (blast dest: apply_type Pi_memberD
intro: apply_equality Pi_type f_imp_injective) qed qed
text‹Kunen's Lemma 10.20› lemma surj_implies_cardinal_le: assumes f: "f ∈ surj(X,Y)"shows"|Y| ≤ |X|" proof (rule lepoll_imp_cardinal_le) from f [THEN surj_implies_inj] obtain g where"g ∈ inj(Y,X)" .. thus"Y < X" by (auto simp add: lepoll_def) qed
text‹Kunen's Lemma 10.21› lemma cardinal_UN_le: assumes K: "InfCard(K)" shows"(∧i. i∈K ==> |X(i)| ≤ K) ==> |∪i∈K. X(i)| ≤ K" proof (simp add: K InfCard_is_Card le_Card_iff) have [intro]: "Ord(K)"by (blast intro: InfCard_is_Card Card_is_Ord K) assume"∧i. i∈K ==> X(i) < K" hence"∧i. i∈K ==>∃f. f ∈ inj(X(i), K)"by (simp add: lepoll_def) with AC_Pi obtain f where f: "f ∈ (∏i∈K. inj(X(i), K))" by force
{ fix z assume z: "z ∈ (∪i∈K. X(i))" thenobtain i where i: "i ∈ K""Ord(i)""z ∈ X(i)" by (blast intro: Ord_in_Ord [of K]) hence"(μ i. z ∈ X(i)) ≤ i"by (fast intro: Least_le) hence"(μ i. z ∈ X(i)) < K"by (best intro: lt_trans1 ltI i) hence"(μ i. z ∈ X(i)) ∈ K"and"z ∈ X(μ i. z ∈ X(i))" by (auto intro: LeastI ltD i)
} note mems = this have"(∪i∈K. X(i)) < K × K" proof (unfold lepoll_def) show"∃f. f ∈ inj(∪RepFun(K, X), K × K)" apply (rule exI) apply (rule_tac c = "λz. ⟨μ i. z ∈ X(i), f ` (μ i. z ∈ X(i)) ` z⟩" and d = "λ⟨i,j⟩. converse (f`i) ` j"in lam_injective) apply (force intro: f inj_is_fun mems apply_type Perm.left_inverse)+ done qed alsohave"... ≈ K" by (simp add: K InfCard_square_eq InfCard_is_Card Card_cardinal_eq) finallyshow"(∪i∈K. X(i)) < K" . qed
text‹The same again, using 🍋‹csucc›\› lemma cardinal_UN_lt_csucc: "[InfCard(K); ∧i. i∈K ==> |X(i)| < csucc(K)] ==> |∪i∈K. X(i)| < csucc(K)" by (simp add: Card_lt_csucc_iff cardinal_UN_le InfCard_is_Card Card_cardinal)
text‹The same again, for a union of ordinals. In use, j(i) is a bit like rank(i), the least ordinal j such that i:Vfrom(A,j).› lemma cardinal_UN_Ord_lt_csucc: "[InfCard(K); ∧i. i∈K ==> j(i) < csucc(K)] ==> (∪i∈K. j(i)) < csucc(K)" apply (rule cardinal_UN_lt_csucc [THEN Card_lt_imp_lt], assumption) apply (blast intro: Ord_cardinal_le [THEN lt_trans1] elim: ltE) apply (blast intro!: Ord_UN elim: ltE) apply (erule InfCard_is_Card [THEN Card_is_Ord, THEN Card_csucc]) done
subsection‹The Main Result for Infinite-Branching Datatypes›
text‹As above, but the index set need not be a cardinal. Work backwards along the injection from 🍋‹W›into 🍋‹K›, given that 🍋‹W≠0›.›
lemma inj_UN_subset: assumes f: "f ∈ inj(A,B)"and a: "a ∈ A" shows"(∪x∈A. C(x)) ⊆ (∪y∈B. C(if y ∈ range(f) then converse(f)`y else a))" proof (rule UN_least) fix x assume x: "x ∈ A" hence fx: "f ` x ∈ B"by (blast intro: f inj_is_fun [THEN apply_type]) have"C(x) ⊆ C(if f ` x ∈ range(f) then converse(f) ` (f ` x) else a)" using f x by (simp add: inj_is_fun [THEN apply_rangeI]) alsohave"... ⊆ (∪y∈B. C(if y ∈ range(f) then converse(f) ` y else a))" by (rule UN_upper [OF fx]) finallyshow"C(x) ⊆ (∪y∈B. C(if y ∈ range(f) then converse(f)`y else a))" . qed
theorem le_UN_Ord_lt_csucc: assumes IK: "InfCard(K)"and WK: "|W| ≤ K"and j: "∧w. w∈W ==> j(w) < csucc(K)" shows"(∪w∈W. j(w)) < csucc(K)" proof - have CK: "Card(K)" by (simp add: InfCard_is_Card IK) thenobtain f where f: "f ∈ inj(W, K)"using WK by(auto simp add: le_Card_iff lepoll_def) have OU: "Ord(∪w∈W. j(w))"using j by (blast elim: ltE) note lt_subset_trans [OF _ _ OU, trans] show ?thesis proof (cases "W=0") case True 🍋‹solve the easy 0 case› thus ?thesis by (simp add: CK Card_is_Ord Card_csucc Ord_0_lt_csucc) next case False thenobtain x where x: "x ∈ W"by blast have"(∪x∈W. j(x)) ⊆ (∪k∈K. j(if k ∈ range(f) then converse(f) ` k else x))" by (rule inj_UN_subset [OF f x]) alsohave"... < csucc(K)"using IK proof (rule cardinal_UN_Ord_lt_csucc) fix k assume"k ∈ K" thus"j(if k ∈ range(f) then converse(f) ` k else x) < csucc(K)"using f x j by (simp add: inj_converse_fun [THEN apply_type]) qed finallyshow ?thesis . qed qed
end
Messung V0.5 in Prozent
¤ Dauer der Verarbeitung: 0.13 Sekunden
(vorverarbeitet am 2026-04-27)
¤
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.