Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[Merged by Bors] - feat(outer_measure): define bounded_by #5314

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

fpvandoorn
Copy link
Member

@fpvandoorn fpvandoorn commented Dec 11, 2020

bounded_by wrapper around of_function that drops the condition that m ∅ = 0.
Refactor Inf_gen to use bounded_by.
I am also planning to use bounded_by for finitary products of measures.

Also add some complete lattice lemmas


bounded_by is a more general version of of_function, which has been used in the library already
also add some complete lattice lemmas
@fpvandoorn fpvandoorn added the awaiting-review The author would like community review of the PR label Dec 11, 2020
satisfying `μ s ≤ m s` for all `s : set α`. This is the same as `outer_measure.of_function`,
except that it doesn't require `m ∅ = 0`. -/
def bounded_by : outer_measure α :=
outer_measure.of_function (λ s, ⨆ (h : s.nonempty), m s) (by simp [empty_not_nonempty])
Copy link
Member

@urkud urkud Dec 11, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is ⨆ (h : s.nonempty), m s more convenient than if s.nonempty then m s else 0 or function.update m ∅ 0?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Anyway,
bors d+

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think the answer is "no". I'm just using what was used before in the measure theory library.
I think ⨆ (h : s.nonempty), _ is better if you don't use classical logic (since it doesn't require any decidability), but we moved away from that anyway. I'm happy to change it to function.update at some point.

@bors
Copy link

bors bot commented Dec 11, 2020

✌️ fpvandoorn can now approve this pull request. To approve and merge a pull request, simply reply with bors r+. More detailed instructions are available here.

@fpvandoorn
Copy link
Member Author

bors merge

@github-actions github-actions bot added ready-to-merge All that is left is for bors to build and merge this PR. (Remember you need to say `bors r+`.) and removed awaiting-review The author would like community review of the PR labels Dec 12, 2020
bors bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 12, 2020
`bounded_by` wrapper around `of_function` that drops the condition that `m ∅ = 0`. 
Refactor `Inf_gen` to use `bounded_by`.
I am also planning to use `bounded_by` for finitary products of measures.

Also add some complete lattice lemmas
@bors
Copy link

bors bot commented Dec 12, 2020

Pull request successfully merged into master.

Build succeeded:

@bors bors bot changed the title feat(outer_measure): define bounded_by [Merged by Bors] - feat(outer_measure): define bounded_by Dec 12, 2020
@bors bors bot closed this Dec 12, 2020
@bors bors bot deleted the bounded_by branch December 12, 2020 04:38
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ready-to-merge All that is left is for bors to build and merge this PR. (Remember you need to say `bors r+`.)
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

2 participants