# File simpdata.ML

    (*  Title:      FOL/simpdata.ML
        ID:         $Id: simpdata.ML,v 1.79 2005/09/12 16:23:50 haftmann Exp $
        Author:     Lawrence C Paulson, Cambridge University Computer Laboratory
        Copyright   1994  University of Cambridge

    Simplification data for FOL.
    *)

    (* Elimination of True from asumptions: *)

    bind_thm ("True_implies_equals", prove_goal IFOL.thy
     "(True ==> PROP P) == PROP P"
    (K [rtac equal_intr_rule 1, atac 2,
              METAHYPS (fn prems => resolve_tac prems 1) 1,
              rtac TrueI 1]));

    (*** Rewrite rules ***)

    fun int_prove_fun s =
     (writeln s;
      prove_goal IFOL.thy s
       (fn prems => [ (cut_facts_tac prems 1),
                      (IntPr.fast_tac 1) ]));

    bind_thms ("conj_simps", map int_prove_fun
     ["P & True <-> P",      "True & P <-> P",
      "P & False <-> False", "False & P <-> False",
      "P & P <-> P", "P & P & Q <-> P & Q",
      "P & ~P <-> False",    "~P & P <-> False",
      "(P & Q) & R <-> P & (Q & R)"]);

    bind_thms ("disj_simps", map int_prove_fun
     ["P | True <-> True",  "True | P <-> True",
      "P | False <-> P",    "False | P <-> P",
      "P | P <-> P", "P | P | Q <-> P | Q",
      "(P | Q) | R <-> P | (Q | R)"]);

    bind_thms ("not_simps", map int_prove_fun
     ["~(P|Q)  <-> ~P & ~Q",
      "~ False <-> True",   "~ True <-> False"]);

    bind_thms ("imp_simps", map int_prove_fun
     ["(P --> False) <-> ~P",       "(P --> True) <-> True",
      "(False --> P) <-> True",     "(True --> P) <-> P",
      "(P --> P) <-> True",         "(P --> ~P) <-> ~P"]);

    bind_thms ("iff_simps", map int_prove_fun
     ["(True <-> P) <-> P",         "(P <-> True) <-> P",
      "(P <-> P) <-> True",
      "(False <-> P) <-> ~P",       "(P <-> False) <-> ~P"]);

    (*The x=t versions are needed for the simplification procedures*)
    bind_thms ("quant_simps", map int_prove_fun
     ["(ALL x. P) <-> P",
      "(ALL x. x=t --> P(x)) <-> P(t)",
      "(ALL x. t=x --> P(x)) <-> P(t)",
      "(EX x. P) <-> P",
      "EX x. x=t", "EX x. t=x",
      "(EX x. x=t & P(x)) <-> P(t)",
      "(EX x. t=x & P(x)) <-> P(t)"]);

    (*These are NOT supplied by default!*)
    bind_thms ("distrib_simps", map int_prove_fun
     ["P & (Q | R) <-> P&Q | P&R",
      "(Q | R) & P <-> Q&P | R&P",
      "(P | Q --> R) <-> (P --> R) & (Q --> R)"]);

    (** Conversion into rewrite rules **)

    bind_thm ("P_iff_F", int_prove_fun "~P ==> (P <-> False)");
    bind_thm ("iff_reflection_F", P_iff_F RS iff_reflection);

    bind_thm ("P_iff_T", int_prove_fun "P ==> (P <-> True)");
    bind_thm ("iff_reflection_T", P_iff_T RS iff_reflection);

    (*Make meta-equalities.  The operator below is Trueprop*)

    fun mk_meta_eq th = case concl_of th of
        _ $ (Const("op =",_)$_$_)   => th RS eq_reflection
      | _ $ (Const("op <->",_)$_$_) => th RS iff_reflection
      | _                           =>
      error("conclusion must be a =-equality or <->");;

    fun mk_eq th = case concl_of th of
        Const("==",_)$_$_           => th
      | _ $ (Const("op =",_)$_$_)   => mk_meta_eq th
      | _ $ (Const("op <->",_)$_$_) => mk_meta_eq th
      | _ $ (Const("Not",_)$_)      => th RS iff_reflection_F
      | _                           => th RS iff_reflection_T;

    (*Replace premises x=y, X<->Y by X==Y*)
    val mk_meta_prems =
        rule_by_tactic
          (REPEAT_FIRST (resolve_tac [meta_eq_to_obj_eq, def_imp_iff]));

    (*Congruence rules for = or <-> (instead of ==)*)
    fun mk_meta_cong rl =
      standard(mk_meta_eq (mk_meta_prems rl))
      handle THM _ =>
      error("Premises and conclusion of congruence rules must use =-equality or <->");

    val mksimps_pairs =
      [("op -->", [mp]), ("op &", [conjunct1,conjunct2]),
       ("All", [spec]), ("True", []), ("False", [])];

    (* ###FIXME: move to simplifier.ML
    val mk_atomize:      (string * thm list) list -> thm -> thm list
    *)
    (* ###FIXME: move to simplifier.ML *)
    fun mk_atomize pairs =
      let fun atoms th =
            (case concl_of th of
               Const("Trueprop",_) $ p =>
                 (case head_of p of
                    Const(a,_) =>
                      (case AList.lookup (op =) pairs a of
                         SOME(rls) => List.concat (map atoms ([th] RL rls))
                       | NONE => [th])
                  | _ => [th])
             | _ => [th])
      in atoms end;

    fun mksimps pairs = (map mk_eq o mk_atomize pairs o gen_all);

    (*** Classical laws ***)

    fun prove_fun s =
     (writeln s;
      prove_goal (the_context ()) s
       (fn prems => [ (cut_facts_tac prems 1),
                      (Cla.fast_tac FOL_cs 1) ]));

    (*Avoids duplication of subgoals after expand_if, when the true and false
      cases boil down to the same thing.*)
    bind_thm ("cases_simp", prove_fun "(P --> Q) & (~P --> Q) <-> Q");

    (*** Miniscoping: pushing quantifiers in
         We do NOT distribute of ALL over &, or dually that of EX over |
         Baaz and Leitsch, On Skolemization and Proof Complexity (1994)
         show that this step can increase proof length!
    ***)

    (*existential miniscoping*)
    bind_thms ("int_ex_simps", map int_prove_fun
     ["(EX x. P(x) & Q) <-> (EX x. P(x)) & Q",
      "(EX x. P & Q(x)) <-> P & (EX x. Q(x))",
      "(EX x. P(x) | Q) <-> (EX x. P(x)) | Q",
      "(EX x. P | Q(x)) <-> P | (EX x. Q(x))"]);

    (*classical rules*)
    bind_thms ("cla_ex_simps", map prove_fun
     ["(EX x. P(x) --> Q) <-> (ALL x. P(x)) --> Q",
      "(EX x. P --> Q(x)) <-> P --> (EX x. Q(x))"]);

    bind_thms ("ex_simps", int_ex_simps @ cla_ex_simps);

    (*universal miniscoping*)
    bind_thms ("int_all_simps", map int_prove_fun
     ["(ALL x. P(x) & Q) <-> (ALL x. P(x)) & Q",
      "(ALL x. P & Q(x)) <-> P & (ALL x. Q(x))",
      "(ALL x. P(x) --> Q) <-> (EX x. P(x)) --> Q",
      "(ALL x. P --> Q(x)) <-> P --> (ALL x. Q(x))"]);

    (*classical rules*)
    bind_thms ("cla_all_simps", map prove_fun
     ["(ALL x. P(x) | Q) <-> (ALL x. P(x)) | Q",
      "(ALL x. P | Q(x)) <-> P | (ALL x. Q(x))"]);

    bind_thms ("all_simps", int_all_simps @ cla_all_simps);

    (*** Named rewrite rules proved for IFOL ***)

    fun int_prove nm thm  = qed_goal nm IFOL.thy thm
        (fn prems => [ (cut_facts_tac prems 1),
                       (IntPr.fast_tac 1) ]);

    fun prove nm thm  = qed_goal nm (the_context ()) thm (fn _ => [Blast_tac 1]);

    int_prove "conj_commute" "P&Q <-> Q&P";
    int_prove "conj_left_commute" "P&(Q&R) <-> Q&(P&R)";
    bind_thms ("conj_comms", [conj_commute, conj_left_commute]);

    int_prove "disj_commute" "P|Q <-> Q|P";
    int_prove "disj_left_commute" "P|(Q|R) <-> Q|(P|R)";
    bind_thms ("disj_comms", [disj_commute, disj_left_commute]);

    int_prove "conj_disj_distribL" "P&(Q|R) <-> (P&Q | P&R)";
    int_prove "conj_disj_distribR" "(P|Q)&R <-> (P&R | Q&R)";

    int_prove "disj_conj_distribL" "P|(Q&R) <-> (P|Q) & (P|R)";
    int_prove "disj_conj_distribR" "(P&Q)|R <-> (P|R) & (Q|R)";

    int_prove "imp_conj_distrib" "(P --> (Q&R)) <-> (P-->Q) & (P-->R)";
    int_prove "imp_conj"         "((P&Q)-->R)   <-> (P --> (Q --> R))";
    int_prove "imp_disj"         "(P|Q --> R)   <-> (P-->R) & (Q-->R)";

    prove "imp_disj1" "(P-->Q) | R <-> (P-->Q | R)";
    prove "imp_disj2" "Q | (P-->R) <-> (P-->Q | R)";

    int_prove "de_Morgan_disj" "(~(P | Q)) <-> (~P & ~Q)";
    prove     "de_Morgan_conj" "(~(P & Q)) <-> (~P | ~Q)";

    prove     "not_imp" "~(P --> Q) <-> (P & ~Q)";
    prove     "not_iff" "~(P <-> Q) <-> (P <-> ~Q)";

    prove     "not_all" "(~ (ALL x. P(x))) <-> (EX x.~P(x))";
    prove     "imp_all" "((ALL x. P(x)) --> Q) <-> (EX x. P(x) --> Q)";
    int_prove "not_ex"  "(~ (EX x. P(x))) <-> (ALL x.~P(x))";
    int_prove "imp_ex" "((EX x. P(x)) --> Q) <-> (ALL x. P(x) --> Q)";

    int_prove "ex_disj_distrib"
        "(EX x. P(x) | Q(x)) <-> ((EX x. P(x)) | (EX x. Q(x)))";
    int_prove "all_conj_distrib"
        "(ALL x. P(x) & Q(x)) <-> ((ALL x. P(x)) & (ALL x. Q(x)))";

    local
    val uncurry = prove_goal (the_context()) "P --> Q --> R ==> P & Q --> R"
                  (fn prems => [cut_facts_tac prems 1, Blast_tac 1]);

    val iff_allI = allI RS
        prove_goal (the_context()) "ALL x. P(x) <-> Q(x) ==> (ALL x. P(x)) <-> (ALL x. Q(x))"
                   (fn prems => [cut_facts_tac prems 1, Blast_tac 1])
    val iff_exI = allI RS
        prove_goal (the_context()) "ALL x. P(x) <-> Q(x) ==> (EX x. P(x)) <-> (EX x. Q(x))"
                   (fn prems => [cut_facts_tac prems 1, Blast_tac 1])

    val all_comm = prove_goal (the_context()) "(ALL x y. P(x,y)) <-> (ALL y x. P(x,y))"
                   (fn _ => [Blast_tac 1])
    val ex_comm = prove_goal (the_context()) "(EX x y. P(x,y)) <-> (EX y x. P(x,y))"
                   (fn _ => [Blast_tac 1])
    in

    (** make simplification procedures for quantifier elimination **)
    structure Quantifier1 = Quantifier1Fun(
    struct
      (*abstract syntax*)
      fun dest_eq((c as Const("op =",_)) $ s $ t) = SOME(c,s,t)
        | dest_eq _ = NONE;
      fun dest_conj((c as Const("op &",_)) $ s $ t) = SOME(c,s,t)
        | dest_conj _ = NONE;
      fun dest_imp((c as Const("op -->",_)) $ s $ t) = SOME(c,s,t)
        | dest_imp _ = NONE;
      val conj = FOLogic.conj
      val imp  = FOLogic.imp
      (*rules*)
      val iff_reflection = iff_reflection
      val iffI = iffI
      val iff_trans = iff_trans
      val conjI= conjI
      val conjE= conjE
      val impI = impI
      val mp   = mp
      val uncurry = uncurry
      val exI  = exI
      val exE  = exE
      val iff_allI = iff_allI
      val iff_exI = iff_exI
      val all_comm = all_comm
      val ex_comm = ex_comm
    end);

    end;

    val defEX_regroup =
      Simplifier.simproc (the_context ())
        "defined EX" ["EX x. P(x)"] Quantifier1.rearrange_ex;

    val defALL_regroup =
      Simplifier.simproc (the_context ())
        "defined ALL" ["ALL x. P(x)"] Quantifier1.rearrange_all;

    (*** Case splitting ***)

    bind_thm ("meta_eq_to_iff", prove_goal IFOL.thy "x==y ==> x<->y"
      (fn [prem] => [rewtac prem, rtac iffI 1, atac 1, atac 1]));

    structure SplitterData =
      struct
      structure Simplifier = Simplifier
      val mk_eq          = mk_eq
      val meta_eq_to_iff = meta_eq_to_iff
      val iffD           = iffD2
      val disjE          = disjE
      val conjE          = conjE
      val exE            = exE
      val contrapos      = contrapos
      val contrapos2     = contrapos2
      val notnotD        = notnotD
      end;

    structure Splitter = SplitterFun(SplitterData);

    val split_tac        = Splitter.split_tac;
    val split_inside_tac = Splitter.split_inside_tac;
    val split_asm_tac    = Splitter.split_asm_tac;
    val op addsplits     = Splitter.addsplits;
    val op delsplits     = Splitter.delsplits;
    val Addsplits        = Splitter.Addsplits;
    val Delsplits        = Splitter.Delsplits;

    (*** Standard simpsets ***)

    structure Induction = InductionFun(struct val spec=IFOL.spec end);

    open Induction;

    bind_thms ("meta_simps",
     [triv_forall_equality,   (* prunes params *)
      True_implies_equals]);  (* prune asms `True' *)

    bind_thms ("IFOL_simps",
     [refl RS P_iff_T] @ conj_simps @ disj_simps @ not_simps @
      imp_simps @ iff_simps @ quant_simps);

    bind_thm ("notFalseI", int_prove_fun "~False");
    bind_thms ("triv_rls", [TrueI,refl,reflexive_thm,iff_refl,notFalseI]);

    fun unsafe_solver prems = FIRST'[resolve_tac (triv_rls@prems),
                                     atac, etac FalseE];
    (*No premature instantiation of variables during simplification*)
    fun   safe_solver prems = FIRST'[match_tac (triv_rls@prems),
                                     eq_assume_tac, ematch_tac [FalseE]];

    (*No simprules, but basic infastructure for simplification*)
    val FOL_basic_ss = empty_ss
      setsubgoaler asm_simp_tac
      setSSolver (mk_solver "FOL safe" safe_solver)
      setSolver (mk_solver "FOL unsafe" unsafe_solver)
      setmksimps (mksimps mksimps_pairs)
      setmkcong mk_meta_cong;

    fun unfold_tac ss ths =
      ALLGOALS (full_simp_tac
        (Simplifier.inherit_bounds ss (Simplifier.clear_ss FOL_basic_ss) addsimps ths));

    (*intuitionistic simprules only*)
    val IFOL_ss = FOL_basic_ss
      addsimps (meta_simps @ IFOL_simps @ int_ex_simps @ int_all_simps)
      addsimprocs [defALL_regroup, defEX_regroup]
      addcongs [imp_cong];

    bind_thms ("cla_simps",
      [de_Morgan_conj, de_Morgan_disj, imp_disj1, imp_disj2,
       not_imp, not_all, not_ex, cases_simp] @
      map prove_fun
       ["~(P&Q) <-> ~P | ~Q",
        "P | ~P",             "~P | P",
        "~ ~ P <-> P",        "(~P --> P) <-> P",
        "(~P <-> ~Q) <-> (P<->Q)"]);

    (*classical simprules too*)
    val FOL_ss = IFOL_ss addsimps (cla_simps @ cla_ex_simps @ cla_all_simps);

    val simpsetup = [fn thy => (simpset_ref_of thy := FOL_ss; thy)];

    (*** integration of simplifier with classical reasoner ***)

    structure Clasimp = ClasimpFun
     (structure Simplifier = Simplifier and Splitter = Splitter
      and Classical  = Cla and Blast = Blast
      val iffD1 = iffD1 val iffD2 = iffD2 val notE = notE
      val cla_make_elim = cla_make_elim);
    open Clasimp;

    val FOL_css = (FOL_cs, FOL_ss);