Stream: Beginner Questions

Topic: Why does simp fail?


view this post on Zulip Jamie Jorgensen (May 18 2023 at 16:00):

Hi folks. I'm very new to Isabelle, and trying to get started by proving some very basic things about 32-bit words. In the following code I prove a lemma, and then try to use the simp tactic to rewrite using my lemma.

 theory Wordplay
  imports Main "Word_Lib.Word_32" "Word_Lib.Hex_Words"
begin
context
  includes bit_operations_syntax
begin

fun ith_and :: "word32 ⇒ word32 ⇒ nat ⇒ bool" where
"ith_and x y i = ((bit x i) ∧ (bit y i))"

lemma to_bl_and : "to_bl(x && y) = rev (map (ith_and x y) [0 ..<32])"
  apply(simp add: to_bl_eq_rev word_size rev_map)
  apply(auto)
  using bit_and_iff apply blast
  using bit_and_iff apply blast
  using bit_and_iff apply blast
  done

lemma and_leq : "∀x y. pop_count (x AND y) ≤ pop_count x"
  apply (simp add: pop_count_def)
  apply(simp add: to_bl_and)

end
end

That last apply(simp add:to_bl_and) fails, even though the goal looks like it could be simplified.

proof (prove)
goal (1 subgoal):
 1. ∀x y. length (filter id (to_bl (x && y)))
           length (filter id (to_bl x))
Failed to apply proof method⌂:
goal (1 subgoal):
 1. ∀x y. length (filter id (to_bl (x && y)))
           length (filter id (to_bl x))

view this post on Zulip Jamie Jorgensen (May 18 2023 at 16:40):

Oh! I think I got it! I guess I need to explicitly declare the types of x and y in this lemma. Sorry to post a question, and then immediately get to the answer. Isn't that always the way it goes? I had been tearing my hair out on this one for a while.

lemma and_leq : "∀x y :: word32. pop_count (x AND y) ≤ pop_count x"
  apply (simp add: pop_count_def)
  apply(simp add: to_bl_and)

(Still not sure if this is the right way to prove this lemma, but I'm making progress at least)

view this post on Zulip Mathias Fleury (May 19 2023 at 05:11):

You could for

lemma and_leq : "pop_count (x AND y) ≤ pop_count x" for x y :: word32

Generally, writing for variables in a lemma is a bad idea (if you don't have to give a type, you can drop the for completely).

view this post on Zulip Mathias Fleury (May 19 2023 at 05:11):

And for words, expect to write a lot of types

view this post on Zulip Mathias Fleury (May 19 2023 at 05:12):

including in intermediate steps if you work on extracting parts of the word

view this post on Zulip Jamie Jorgensen (May 22 2023 at 02:51):

Mathias Fleury said:

You could for

lemma and_leq : "pop_count (x AND y) ≤ pop_count x" for x y :: word32

Generally, writing for variables in a lemma is a bad idea (if you don't have to give a type, you can drop the for completely).

Thank you! Very helpful!


Last updated: Dec 21 2024 at 16:20 UTC