IMP_RES_THENThm_cont.IMP_RES_THEN : thm_tactical
Resolves an implication with the assumptions of a goal.
The function IMP_RES_THEN is the basic building block
for resolution in HOL. This is not full higher-order, or even
first-order, resolution with unification, but simply one way
simultaneous pattern-matching (resulting in term and type instantiation)
of the antecedent of an implicative theorem to the conclusion of another
theorem (the candidate antecedent).
Given a theorem-tactic ttac and a theorem
th, the theorem-tactical IMP_RES_THEN uses
RES_CANON to derive a canonical list of implications from
th, each of which has the form:
Ai |- !x1...xn. ui ==> vi
IMP_RES_THEN then produces a tactic that, when applied
to a goal A ?- g attempts to match each antecedent
ui to each assumption aj |- aj in the
assumptions A. If the antecedent ui of any
implication matches the conclusion aj of any assumption,
then an instance of the theorem Ai u {aj} |- vi, called a
‘resolvent’, is obtained by specialization of the variables
x1, …, xn and type instantiation, followed by
an application of modus ponens. There may be more than one canonical
implication and each implication is tried against every assumption of
the goal, so there may be several resolvents (or, indeed, none).
Tactics are produced using the theorem-tactic ttac from
all these resolvents (failures of ttac at this stage are
filtered out) and these tactics are then applied in an unspecified
sequence to the goal. That is,
IMP_RES_THEN ttac th (A ?- g)
has the effect of:
MAP_EVERY (mapfilter ttac [... , (Ai u {aj} |- vi) , ...]) (A ?- g)
where the theorems Ai u {aj} |- vi are all the
consequences that can be drawn by a (single) matching modus-ponens
inference from the assumptions of the goal A ?- g and the
implications derived from the supplied theorem th. The
sequence in which the theorems Ai u {aj} |- vi are
generated and the corresponding tactics applied is unspecified.
Evaluating IMP_RES_THEN ttac th fails if the supplied
theorem th is not an implication, or if no implications can
be derived from th by the transformation process described
under the entry for RES_CANON. Evaluating
IMP_RES_THEN ttac th (A ?- g) fails if no assumption of the
goal A ?- g can be resolved with the implication or
implications derived from th. Evaluation also fails if
there are resolvents, but for every resolvent
Ai u {aj} |- vi evaluating the application
ttac (Ai u {aj} |- vi) fails—that is, if for every
resolvent ttac fails to produce a tactic. Finally, failure
is propagated if any of the tactics that are produced from the
resolvents by ttac fails when applied in sequence to the
goal.
The following example shows a straightforward use of
IMP_RES_THEN to infer an equational consequence of the
assumptions of a goal, use it once as a substitution in the conclusion
of goal, and then ‘throw it away’. Suppose the goal is:
a + n = a ?- !k. k - n = k
By the built-in theorem:
ADD_INV_0 = |- !m n. (m + n = m) ==> (n = 0)
the assumption of this goal implies that n equals
0. A single-step resolution with this theorem followed by
substitution:
IMP_RES_THEN SUBST1_TAC ADD_INV_0
can therefore be used to reduce the goal to:
a + n = a ?- !k. k - 0 = m
Here, a single resolvent a + n = a |- n = 0 is obtained
by matching the antecedent of ADD_INV_0 to the assumption
of the goal. This is then used to substitute 0 for
n in the conclusion of the goal.
Tactic.IMP_RES_TAC, Drule.MATCH_MP, Drule.RES_CANON, Tactic.RES_TAC, Thm_cont.RES_THEN