Skip to content

Enhancement Proposals

Olivier Laurent edited this page May 19, 2021 · 27 revisions

Formula Definitions

  • Goal: provide short names for compound formulas, and rely on the same mechanism to manipulate infinite formulas described through recursive equations
    𝔹 ::= (A βŠ— A) ⊸ (A βŠ— A)
    β„• ::= !(A ⊸ A) ⊸ !(A ⊸ A)
    o ::= !o ⊸ o
    
  • Interface:
    • provide a list of fields to input expressions of the shape name ::= formula
    • name can be "defined" only once
    • clicking on an atom name (or dual nameβŠ₯) which is a defined name unfolds the definition once (or its dual)
    • possibilities for unfold rule display:
      • implicit: in place unfold as for implicit exchange
      • explicit: this unfold rule might be displayed differently from others with dashed line for example
  • Code:
    • register an association table (name, formula) according to input definitions by the user
    • add unfold rule with premise ⊒ Ξ“, A, Ξ” and conclusion ⊒ Ξ“, X, Ξ”, and with premise ⊒ Ξ“, AβŠ₯, Ξ” and conclusion ⊒ Ξ“, XβŠ₯, Ξ” if (X, A) is a registered definition
    • unfold has priority over axiom: clicking on X in ⊒ X, XβŠ₯ unfolds X if X is defined rather than applying an axiom rule (axiom rule is reachable through clicking on the turnstile)
    • Coq export
      • non-recursive definitions using Notation: allows implicit use of definitions, entails some automatic folding
      • non-recursive definitions using Definition: explicit unfold matches use of unfold rule
      • recursive definitions: to be investigated, maybe using a co-inductive definition of formulas
  • Possible Extensions:
    • automatic folding a formula A into X if a definition X ::= A is detected
      • what if two definitions X ::= A and Y ::= A?
      • if we have both β„• ::= !(A ⊸ A) ⊸ !(A ⊸ A) and 𝕃 ::= !(A ⊸ A) ⊸ !(A ⊸ A) ⊸ !(A ⊸ A), do we want unfolding of 𝕃 to give !(A ⊸ A) ⊸ β„•?

Cut Rule

  • Discussion: issue #12
  • Goal: integrate cut rule in proof construction
  • Interface:
    • activate cut rule through option
    • in cut mode, sequents are displayed as ⊒ . E , F , G , H . where both , and . are clickable
    • click on active , or . opens a pop-up asking for a cut formula A
    • the cut rule is applied in the following shape with context split at clicking point
      ⊒ . Ξ“ , A .      ⊒ . A^ , Ξ” .
      ─────────────────────────────
              ⊒ . Ξ“ , Ξ” .
      
  • Code:
    • add a constructor to proof: Cut_proof of formula list * formula * formula list * proof * proof
    • Coq export
      • define two installation modes for NanoYalla
      • one binding to Yalla and providing a certified proof of cut admissibility
      • one which is autonomous but introduces cut admissibility as an axiom

Explicit Exchange

  • Discussion: issue #11
  • Goal: display explicit exchange rules in the interface
  • Code: provided as an option
  • Interface:
    • drag and drop is restricted to hypotheses of proofs (if applied inside a proof, reset proof to this point)
    • a drag and drop operation on a sequent which is not premise of an explicit exchange rule generates an exchange rule
    • a drag and drop operation on a sequent which is premise of an explicit exchange rule does not generate a new rule and updates the permutation
  • Options / Choices:
    • mention the permutation in the rule name
    • use explicit exchange rules of the shape ⊒ Ξ“, A, Ξ”, Ξ£ <-> ⊒ Ξ“, Ξ”, A, Ξ£ (thus matching each drag and drop operation)
    • add colors to follow occurrences

Cyclic Proofs

  • Goal: dealing with infinite proofs through back edges connecting a proof leaf to an identical sequent met previously during proof construction
  • Interface: drag and drop a turnstile symbol to another sequent which is equal (not up to permutation since permutation is meaningful) and lower in the proof (this has to be checked)

Clone this wiki locally