Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

coq-club - Re: [Coq-Club] Problem proving "no number larger than n is in the subset of numbers up to n"

coq-club AT inria.fr

Subject: The Coq mailing list

List archive

Re: [Coq-Club] Problem proving "no number larger than n is in the subset of numbers up to n"


Chronological Thread 
  • From: Volker Stolz <stolz+coq AT ifi.uio.no>
  • To: coq-club AT inria.fr
  • Subject: Re: [Coq-Club] Problem proving "no number larger than n is in the subset of numbers up to n"
  • Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 09:45:03 +0100
  • Authentication-results: mail3-smtp-sop.national.inria.fr; spf=None smtp.pra=stolz+coq AT ifi.uio.no; spf=None smtp.mailfrom=stolz+coq AT ifi.uio.no; spf=None smtp.helo=postmaster AT mail-out4.uio.no
  • Ironport-phdr: 9a23:dPU5xBAny05HFxwkKBKsUyQJP3N1i/DPJgcQr6AfoPdwSP74r8bcNUDSrc9gkEXOFd2CrakU1qyG4uu5ADxIyK3CmU5BWaQEbwUCh8QSkl5oK+++Imq/EsTXaTcnFt9JTl5v8iLzG0FUHMHjew+a+SXqvnYsExnyfTB4Ov7yUtaLyZ/niqbiqtaKOlUArQH+SI0xBS3+lR/WuMgSjNkqAYcK4TyNnEF1ff9Lz3hjP1OZkkW0zM6x+Jl+73YY4Kp5pIYTGZn9Kq8/VPlTCCksG2Ez/szi8xfZHiWV4X5JbGISkRdSSzPZ6xXoFsPqriz+pKl23zCyPMP3C601XnKk6PE4G1fTlC4bOmthoynsgctqgfcDrQ==

Dear Laurent, dear Amin, thank you for your answers -- unfortunately
they both seem to subvert the spirit of my original problem :-)

So here is my actual problem:

PF is a representation of propositional formulae bool
True/False, props of some type, and negation on disjunction to build
terms. That is, I have terms as a tree structure.

Section PF.
Variable A : Set.

Inductive pf : Type :=
| bT : pf
| bF : pf
| p (a:A) : pf
| neg (phi:pf) : pf
| or (phi psi: pf) : pf.

Require Import Ensembles.
Require Import Finite_sets.
Require Import Finite_sets_facts.

Fixpoint sf phi : Ensemble pf :=
match phi with
| bT => Singleton pf bT
| bF => Singleton _ bF
| p x => Singleton _ (p x)
| neg phi' => Add _ (sf phi') phi
| or phi' psi' => Add _ (Union _ (sf phi') (sf psi')) phi
end.

And here is my problematic property:

Hypothesis negNotInSelf: forall phi, ~In _ (sf phi) (neg phi).

I.e. sf bT := {bT}, and it does not contain (neg bT). I would hope that
once I've figured that out, the "or" (binary) case would work
analogously. I also tried some variations along the lines of not just
(neg phi), but anything "larger", but didn't have any success with the
formulation.

Best, Volker



Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.18.

Top of Page