(* Title: HOL/Proofs/Extraction/Pigeonhole.thy Author: Stefan Berghofer, TU Muenchen *)
section‹The pigeonhole principle›
theory Pigeonhole imports Util "HOL-Library.Realizers""HOL-Library.Code_Target_Numeral" begin
text‹ We formalize two proofs of the pigeonhole principle, which lead to extracted programs of quite different complexity. The original formalization of these proofs in {\sc Nuprl} is due to Aleksey Nogin 🍋‹"Nogin-ENTCS-2000"›. This proof yields a polynomial program. ›
theorem pigeonhole: "∧f. (∧i. i ≤ Suc n ==> f i ≤ n) ==>∃i j. i ≤ Suc n ∧ j < i ∧ f i = f j" proof (induct n) case 0 thenhave"Suc 0 ≤ Suc 0 ∧ 0 < Suc 0 ∧ f (Suc 0) = f 0"by simp thenshow ?caseby iprover next case (Suc n) have r: "k ≤ Suc (Suc n) ==> (∧i j. Suc k ≤ i ==> i ≤ Suc (Suc n) ==> j < i ==> f i ≠ f j) ==> (∃i j. i ≤ k ∧ j < i ∧ f i = f j)"for k proof (induct k) case 0 let ?f = "λi. if f i = Suc n then f (Suc (Suc n)) else f i" have"¬ (∃i j. i ≤ Suc n ∧ j < i ∧ ?f i = ?f j)" proof assume"∃i j. i ≤ Suc n ∧ j < i ∧ ?f i = ?f j" thenobtain i j where i: "i ≤ Suc n"and j: "j < i"and f: "?f i = ?f j" by iprover from j have i_nz: "Suc 0 ≤ i"by simp from i have iSSn: "i ≤ Suc (Suc n)"by simp have S0SSn: "Suc 0 ≤ Suc (Suc n)"by simp show False proof cases assume fi: "f i = Suc n" show False proof cases assume fj: "f j = Suc n" from i_nz and iSSn and j have"f i ≠ f j"by (rule 0) moreoverfrom fi have"f i = f j" by (simp add: fj [symmetric]) ultimatelyshow ?thesis .. next from i and j have"j < Suc (Suc n)"by simp with S0SSn and le_refl have"f (Suc (Suc n)) ≠ f j" by (rule 0) moreoverassume"f j ≠ Suc n" with fi and f have"f (Suc (Suc n)) = f j"by simp ultimatelyshow False .. qed next assume fi: "f i ≠ Suc n" show False proof cases from i have"i < Suc (Suc n)"by simp with S0SSn and le_refl have"f (Suc (Suc n)) ≠ f i" by (rule 0) moreoverassume"f j = Suc n" with fi and f have"f (Suc (Suc n)) = f i"by simp ultimatelyshow False .. next from i_nz and iSSn and j have"f i ≠ f j"by (rule 0) moreoverassume"f j ≠ Suc n" with fi and f have"f i = f j"by simp ultimatelyshow False .. qed qed qed moreoverhave"?f i ≤ n"if"i ≤ Suc n"for i proof - from that have i: "i < Suc (Suc n)"by simp have"f (Suc (Suc n)) ≠ f i" by (rule 0) (simp_all add: i) moreoverhave"f (Suc (Suc n)) ≤ Suc n" by (rule Suc) simp moreoverfrom i have"i ≤ Suc (Suc n)"by simp thenhave"f i ≤ Suc n"by (rule Suc) ultimatelyshow ?thesis by simp qed thenhave"∃i j. i ≤ Suc n ∧ j < i ∧ ?f i = ?f j" by (rule Suc) ultimatelyshow ?case .. next case (Suc k) from search [OF nat_eq_dec] show ?case proof assume"∃j thenshow ?caseby (iprover intro: le_refl) next assume nex: "¬ (∃j have"∃i j. i ≤ k ∧ j < i ∧ f i = f j" proof (rule Suc) from Suc show"k ≤ Suc (Suc n)"by simp fix i j assume k: "Suc k ≤ i"and i: "i ≤ Suc (Suc n)" and j: "j < i" show"f i ≠ f j" proof cases assume eq: "i = Suc k" show ?thesis proof assume"f i = f j" thenhave"f (Suc k) = f j"by (simp add: eq) with nex and j and eq show False by iprover qed next assume"i ≠ Suc k" with k have"Suc (Suc k) ≤ i"by simp thenshow ?thesis using i and j by (rule Suc) qed qed thenshow ?thesis by (iprover intro: le_SucI) qed qed show ?caseby (rule r) simp_all qed
text‹ The following proof, although quite elegant from a mathematical point of view, leads to an exponential program: ›
theorem pigeonhole_slow: "∧f. (∧i. i ≤ Suc n ==> f i ≤ n) ==>∃i j. i ≤ Suc n ∧ j < i ∧ f i = f j" proof (induct n) case 0 have"Suc 0 ≤ Suc 0" .. moreoverhave"0 < Suc 0" .. moreoverfrom 0 have"f (Suc 0) = f 0"by simp ultimatelyshow ?caseby iprover next case (Suc n) from search [OF nat_eq_dec] show ?case proof assume"∃j < Suc (Suc n). f (Suc (Suc n)) = f j" thenshow ?caseby (iprover intro: le_refl) next assume"¬ (∃j < Suc (Suc n). f (Suc (Suc n)) = f j)" thenhave nex: "∀j < Suc (Suc n). f (Suc (Suc n)) ≠ f j"by iprover let ?f = "λi. if f i = Suc n then f (Suc (Suc n)) else f i" have"∧i. i ≤ Suc n ==> ?f i ≤ n" proof - fix i assume i: "i ≤ Suc n" show"?thesis i" proof (cases "f i = Suc n") case True from i and nex have"f (Suc (Suc n)) ≠ f i"by simp with True have"f (Suc (Suc n)) ≠ Suc n"by simp moreoverfrom Suc have"f (Suc (Suc n)) ≤ Suc n"by simp ultimatelyhave"f (Suc (Suc n)) ≤ n"by simp with True show ?thesis by simp next case False from Suc and i have"f i ≤ Suc n"by simp with False show ?thesis by simp qed qed thenhave"∃i j. i ≤ Suc n ∧ j < i ∧ ?f i = ?f j"by (rule Suc) thenobtain i j where i: "i ≤ Suc n"and ji: "j < i"and f: "?f i = ?f j" by iprover have"f i = f j" proof (cases "f i = Suc n") case True show ?thesis proof (cases "f j = Suc n") assume"f j = Suc n" with True show ?thesis by simp next assume"f j ≠ Suc n" moreoverfrom i ji nex have"f (Suc (Suc n)) ≠ f j"by simp ultimatelyshow ?thesis using True f by simp qed next case False show ?thesis proof (cases "f j = Suc n") assume"f j = Suc n" moreoverfrom i nex have"f (Suc (Suc n)) ≠ f i"by simp ultimatelyshow ?thesis using False f by simp next assume"f j ≠ Suc n" with False f show ?thesis by simp qed qed moreoverfrom i have"i ≤ Suc (Suc n)"by simp ultimatelyshow ?thesis using ji by iprover qed qed
extract pigeonhole pigeonhole_slow
text‹ The programs extracted from the above proofs look as follows: @{thm [display] pigeonhole_def} @{thm [display] pigeonhole_slow_def} The program for searching for an element in an array is @{thm [display,eta_contract=false] search_def} The correctness statement for 🍋‹pigeonhole›is @{thm [display] pigeonhole_correctness [no_vars]} In order to analyze the speed of the above programs, we generate ML code from them. ›
instantiation nat :: default begin
definition"default = (0::nat)"
instance ..
end
instantiation prod :: (default, default) default begin
definition"default = (default, default)"
instance ..
end
definition"test n u = pigeonhole (nat_of_integer n) (λm. m - 1)" definition"test' n u = pigeonhole_slow (nat_of_integer n) (λm. m - 1)" definition"test'' u = pigeonhole 8 (List.nth [0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 3, 7, 8])"
Die Informationen auf dieser Webseite wurden
nach bestem Wissen sorgfältig zusammengestellt. Es wird jedoch weder Vollständigkeit, noch Richtigkeit,
noch Qualität der bereit gestellten Informationen zugesichert.
Bemerkung:
Die farbliche Syntaxdarstellung und die Messung sind noch experimentell.