(33) Induction-Processor (SOUND transformation)
This DP could be deleted by the Induction-Processor:REVERSE(
cons(
x,
xs)) →
REVERSE(
del(
last(
cons(
x,
xs)),
cons(
x,
xs)))
This order was computed:Polynomial interpretation [POLO]:
POL(0) = 3
POL(REVERSE(x1)) = x1
POL(cons(x1, x2)) = 1 + 2·x1 + 2·x2
POL(del(x1, x2)) = x2
POL(eq(x1, x2)) = 2·x1
POL(false) = 0
POL(if(x1, x2, x3, x4)) = 1 + 2·x3 + 2·x4
POL(last(x1)) = 2 + 2·x1
POL(nil) = 3
POL(s(x1)) = x1
POL(true) = 3
At least one of these decreasing rules is always used after the deleted DP:if(
true,
x595,
y445,
xs285) →
xs285The following formula is valid:z0:sort[a24].(¬(
z0 =
nil)→
del'(
last(
z0 ),
z0 )=
true)
The transformed set:del'(
x16,
cons(
y11,
xs7)) →
if'(
eq(
x16,
y11),
x16,
y11,
xs7)
if'(
true,
x59,
y44,
xs28) →
trueif'(
false,
x68,
y51,
xs33) →
del'(
x68,
xs33)
del'(
x77,
nil) →
falselast(
cons(
x,
nil)) →
xlast(
cons(
x7,
cons(
y4,
xs2))) →
last(
cons(
y4,
xs2))
del(
x16,
cons(
y11,
xs7)) →
if(
eq(
x16,
y11),
x16,
y11,
xs7)
eq(
0,
0) →
trueeq(
0,
s(
y24)) →
falseeq(
s(
x41),
0) →
falseeq(
s(
x50),
s(
y37)) →
eq(
x50,
y37)
if(
true,
x59,
y44,
xs28) →
xs28if(
false,
x68,
y51,
xs33) →
cons(
y51,
del(
x68,
xs33))
del(
x77,
nil) →
nillast(
nil) →
0equal_bool(
true,
false) →
falseequal_bool(
false,
true) →
falseequal_bool(
true,
true) →
trueequal_bool(
false,
false) →
trueand(
true,
x) →
xand(
false,
x) →
falseor(
true,
x) →
trueor(
false,
x) →
xnot(
false) →
truenot(
true) →
falseisa_true(
true) →
trueisa_true(
false) →
falseisa_false(
true) →
falseisa_false(
false) →
trueequal_sort[a0](
0,
0) →
trueequal_sort[a0](
0,
s(
x0)) →
falseequal_sort[a0](
s(
x0),
0) →
falseequal_sort[a0](
s(
x0),
s(
x1)) →
equal_sort[a0](
x0,
x1)
equal_sort[a24](
cons(
x0,
x1),
cons(
x2,
x3)) →
and(
equal_sort[a24](
x0,
x2),
equal_sort[a24](
x1,
x3))
equal_sort[a24](
cons(
x0,
x1),
nil) →
falseequal_sort[a24](
nil,
cons(
x0,
x1)) →
falseequal_sort[a24](
nil,
nil) →
trueequal_sort[a42](
witness_sort[a42],
witness_sort[a42]) →
trueThe proof given by the theorem prover:The following input was given to ACL2:
(set-ruler-extenders :all)
(defun trs_isbool (x)
(or
(and
(consp
x
)
(eq
'trs_true
(car
x
)
)
(eq
(cdr
x
)
'nil
)
)
(and
(consp
x
)
(eq
'trs_false
(car
x
)
)
(eq
(cdr
x
)
'nil
)
)
)
)
(defun trs_issort[a0] (x)
(or
(and
(consp
x
)
(eq
'trs_0
(car
x
)
)
(eq
(cdr
x
)
'nil
)
)
(and
(consp
x
)
(consp
(cdr
x
)
)
(eq
'trs_s
(car
x
)
)
(trs_issort[a0]
(car
(cdr
x
)
)
)
(eq
(cdr
(cdr
x
)
)
'nil
)
)
)
)
(defun trs_issort[a42] (x)
(or
(and
(consp
x
)
(eq
'trs_witness_sort[a42]
(car
x
)
)
(eq
(cdr
x
)
'nil
)
)
)
)
(defun trs_issort[a24] (x)
(or
(and
(consp
x
)
(consp
(cdr
x
)
)
(consp
(cdr
(cdr
x
)
)
)
(eq
'trs_cons
(car
x
)
)
(trs_issort[a0]
(car
(cdr
x
)
)
)
(trs_issort[a24]
(car
(cdr
(cdr
x
)
)
)
)
(eq
(cdr
(cdr
(cdr
x
)
)
)
'nil
)
)
(and
(consp
x
)
(eq
'trs_nil
(car
x
)
)
(eq
(cdr
x
)
'nil
)
)
)
)
(defun trs_last (x0)
(if
(and
(trs_issort[a24]
x0
)
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_cons
)
(eq
(car
(car
(cdr
(cdr
x0
)
)
)
)
'trs_nil
)
)
(car
(cdr
x0
)
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_cons
)
(eq
(car
(car
(cdr
(cdr
x0
)
)
)
)
'trs_cons
)
)
(trs_last
(list 'trs_cons
(car
(cdr
(car
(cdr
(cdr
x0
)
)
)
)
)
(car
(cdr
(cdr
(car
(cdr
(cdr
x0
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
(if
(and
)
(list 'trs_0
)
(list 'trs_0
)
)
)
)
(list 'trs_0
)
)
)
(defun trs_eq (x0 x1)
(if
(and
(trs_issort[a0]
x0
)
(trs_issort[a0]
x1
)
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_0
)
(eq
(car
x1
)
'trs_0
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_0
)
(eq
(car
x1
)
'trs_s
)
)
(list 'trs_false
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_s
)
(eq
(car
x1
)
'trs_0
)
)
(list 'trs_false
)
(if
(and
)
(trs_eq
(car
(cdr
x0
)
)
(car
(cdr
x1
)
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
(defun trs_equal_sort[a42] (x0 x1)
(if
(and
(trs_issort[a42]
x0
)
(trs_issort[a42]
x1
)
)
(if
(and
)
(list 'trs_true
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
(defun trs_equal_sort[a0] (x0 x1)
(if
(and
(trs_issort[a0]
x0
)
(trs_issort[a0]
x1
)
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_0
)
(eq
(car
x1
)
'trs_0
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_0
)
(eq
(car
x1
)
'trs_s
)
)
(list 'trs_false
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_s
)
(eq
(car
x1
)
'trs_0
)
)
(list 'trs_false
)
(if
(and
)
(trs_equal_sort[a0]
(car
(cdr
x0
)
)
(car
(cdr
x1
)
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
(defun trs_isa_false (x0)
(if
(and
(trs_isbool
x0
)
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_true
)
)
(list 'trs_false
)
(if
(and
)
(list 'trs_true
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
(defun trs_isa_true (x0)
(if
(and
(trs_isbool
x0
)
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_true
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
(if
(and
)
(list 'trs_false
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
(defun trs_not (x0)
(if
(and
(trs_isbool
x0
)
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_false
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
(if
(and
)
(list 'trs_false
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
(defun trs_or (x0 x1)
(if
(and
(trs_isbool
x0
)
(trs_isbool
x1
)
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_true
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
(if
(and
)
x1
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
(defun trs_and (x0 x1)
(if
(and
(trs_isbool
x0
)
(trs_isbool
x1
)
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_true
)
)
x1
(if
(and
)
(list 'trs_false
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
(defun trs_equal_bool (x0 x1)
(if
(and
(trs_isbool
x0
)
(trs_isbool
x1
)
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_true
)
(eq
(car
x1
)
'trs_false
)
)
(list 'trs_false
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_false
)
(eq
(car
x1
)
'trs_true
)
)
(list 'trs_false
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_true
)
(eq
(car
x1
)
'trs_true
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
(if
(and
)
(list 'trs_true
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
(defun trs_if (x0 x1 x2 x3)
(if
(and
(trs_isbool
x0
)
(trs_issort[a0]
x1
)
(trs_issort[a0]
x2
)
(trs_issort[a24]
x3
)
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_true
)
)
x3
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_false
)
(eq
(car
x3
)
'trs_cons
)
)
(list 'trs_cons
x2
(trs_if
(trs_eq
x1
(car
(cdr
x3
)
)
)
x1
(car
(cdr
x3
)
)
(car
(cdr
(cdr
x3
)
)
)
)
)
(if
(and
)
(list 'trs_cons
x2
(list 'trs_nil
)
)
(list 'trs_nil
)
)
)
)
(list 'trs_nil
)
)
)
(defun trs_ifprime (x0 x1 x2 x3)
(if
(and
(trs_isbool
x0
)
(trs_issort[a0]
x1
)
(trs_issort[a0]
x2
)
(trs_issort[a24]
x3
)
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_true
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_false
)
(eq
(car
x3
)
'trs_cons
)
)
(trs_ifprime
(trs_eq
x1
(car
(cdr
x3
)
)
)
x1
(car
(cdr
x3
)
)
(car
(cdr
(cdr
x3
)
)
)
)
(if
(and
)
(list 'trs_false
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
(defun trs_del (x0 x1)
(if
(and
(trs_issort[a0]
x0
)
(trs_issort[a24]
x1
)
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x1
)
'trs_nil
)
)
(list 'trs_nil
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x1
)
'trs_cons
)
(eq
(trs_equal_bool
(trs_eq
x0
(car
(cdr
x1
)
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
(car
(cdr
(cdr
x1
)
)
)
(if
(and
(eq
(trs_equal_bool
(trs_eq
x0
(car
(cdr
x1
)
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
(list 'trs_false
)
)
)
(list 'trs_cons
(car
(cdr
x1
)
)
(trs_del
x0
(car
(cdr
(cdr
x1
)
)
)
)
)
(list 'trs_nil
)
)
)
)
(list 'trs_nil
)
)
)
(defun trs_delprime (x0 x1)
(if
(and
(trs_issort[a0]
x0
)
(trs_issort[a24]
x1
)
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x1
)
'trs_nil
)
)
(list 'trs_false
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x1
)
'trs_cons
)
(eq
(trs_equal_bool
(trs_eq
x0
(car
(cdr
x1
)
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
(if
(and
(eq
(trs_equal_bool
(trs_eq
x0
(car
(cdr
x1
)
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
(list 'trs_false
)
)
)
(trs_delprime
x0
(car
(cdr
(cdr
x1
)
)
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
(defun trs_equal_sort[a24] (x0 x1)
(if
(and
(trs_issort[a24]
x0
)
(trs_issort[a24]
x1
)
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_cons
)
(eq
(car
x1
)
'trs_cons
)
)
(trs_and
(trs_equal_sort[a24]
(car
(cdr
x0
)
)
(car
(cdr
x1
)
)
)
(trs_equal_sort[a24]
(car
(cdr
(cdr
x0
)
)
)
(car
(cdr
(cdr
x1
)
)
)
)
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_cons
)
(eq
(car
x1
)
'trs_nil
)
)
(list 'trs_false
)
(if
(and
(eq
(car
x0
)
'trs_nil
)
(eq
(car
x1
)
'trs_cons
)
)
(list 'trs_false
)
(if
(and
)
(list 'trs_true
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
)
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
(with-prover-time-limit 3
(defthm test
(implies
(and
(trs_issort[a24] trs_z0)
)
(implies
(not
(eq
trs_z0
(list 'trs_nil
)
)
)
(eq
(trs_delprime
(trs_last
trs_z0
)
trs_z0
)
(list 'trs_true
)
)
)
)
:hints (("Goal" :do-not '(generalize)))
)
)The following output was given by ACL2:
This is SBCL 1.0.29.11.debian, an implementation of ANSI Common Lisp.
More information about SBCL is available at .
SBCL is free software, provided as is, with absolutely no warranty.
It is mostly in the public domain; some portions are provided under
BSD-style licenses. See the CREDITS and COPYING files in the
distribution for more information.
ACL2 Version 3.6 built February 12, 2010 14:59:57.
Copyright (C) 2009 University of Texas at Austin
ACL2 comes with ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY. This is free software and you
are welcome to redistribute it under certain conditions. For details,
see the GNU General Public License.
Initialized with (INITIALIZE-ACL2 'INCLUDE-BOOK *ACL2-PASS-2-FILES*).
See the documentation topic note-3-6 for recent changes.
Note: We have modified the prompt in some underlying Lisps to further
distinguish it from the ACL2 prompt.
ACL2 Version 3.6. Level 1. Cbd "/home/petersk/workspace/benchmark/".
Distributed books directory "/home/petersk/download/acl2-sources/books/".
Type :help for help.
Type (good-bye) to quit completely out of ACL2.
ACL2 !> :ALL
ACL2 !>
Since TRS_ISBOOL is non-recursive, its admission is trivial. We observe
that the type of TRS_ISBOOL is described by the theorem
(OR (EQUAL (TRS_ISBOOL X) T) (EQUAL (TRS_ISBOOL X) NIL)). We used
the :executable-counterpart of EQUAL and primitive type reasoning.
Summary
Form: ( DEFUN TRS_ISBOOL ...)
Rules: ((:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART EQUAL)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-TYPE-SET NIL))
Warnings: None
Time: 0.00 seconds (prove: 0.00, print: 0.00, other: 0.00)
TRS_ISBOOL
ACL2 !>
For the admission of TRS_ISSORT[A0] we will use the relation O< (which
is known to be well-founded on the domain recognized by O-P) and the
measure (ACL2-COUNT X). The non-trivial part of the measure conjecture
is
Goal
(IMPLIES (AND (NOT (AND (CONSP X)
(EQ 'TRS_0 (CAR X))
(EQ (CDR X) NIL)))
(CONSP X)
(CONSP (CDR X))
(EQ 'TRS_S (CAR X)))
(O< (ACL2-COUNT (CADR X))
(ACL2-COUNT X))).
By the simple :definition EQ we reduce the conjecture to
Goal'
(IMPLIES (AND (NOT (AND (CONSP X)
(EQUAL 'TRS_0 (CAR X))
(EQUAL (CDR X) NIL)))
(CONSP X)
(CONSP (CDR X))
(EQUAL 'TRS_S (CAR X)))
(O< (ACL2-COUNT (CADR X))
(ACL2-COUNT X))).
This simplifies, using the :definitions ACL2-COUNT, FIX, O-FINP and
O<, the :executable-counterparts of ACL2-COUNT and EQUAL, primitive
type reasoning, the :rewrite rule UNICITY-OF-0 and the :type-prescription
rule ACL2-COUNT, to
Goal''
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP X)
(CONSP (CDR X))
(EQUAL 'TRS_S (CAR X)))
(< (ACL2-COUNT (CADR X))
(+ 1 (ACL2-COUNT (CDR X))))).
The destructor terms (CAR X) and (CDR X) can be eliminated. Furthermore,
those terms are at the root of a chain of two rounds of destructor
elimination. (1) Use CAR-CDR-ELIM to replace X by (CONS X1 X2), (CAR X)
by X1 and (CDR X) by X2 and restrict the type of the new variable X1
to be that of the term it replaces. (2) Use CAR-CDR-ELIM, again, to
replace X2 by (CONS X3 X4), (CAR X2) by X3 and (CDR X2) by X4. These
steps produce the following goal.
Goal'''
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP (CONS X3 X4))
(SYMBOLP X1)
(NOT (EQUAL X1 T))
(NOT (EQUAL X1 NIL))
(CONSP (LIST* X1 X3 X4))
(EQUAL 'TRS_S X1))
(< (ACL2-COUNT X3)
(+ 1 (ACL2-COUNT (CONS X3 X4))))).
By case analysis we reduce the conjecture to
Goal'4'
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP (CONS X3 X4))
(SYMBOLP X1)
(NOT (EQUAL X1 T))
X1 (CONSP (LIST* X1 X3 X4))
(EQUAL 'TRS_S X1))
(< (ACL2-COUNT X3)
(+ 1 (ACL2-COUNT (CONS X3 X4))))).
This simplifies, using the :definition ACL2-COUNT, the :executable-
counterparts of EQUAL, NOT and SYMBOLP, primitive type reasoning and
the :rewrite rules CAR-CONS and CDR-CONS, to
Goal'5'
(< (ACL2-COUNT X3)
(+ 1 1 (ACL2-COUNT X3)
(ACL2-COUNT X4))).
But simplification reduces this to T, using linear arithmetic, primitive
type reasoning and the :type-prescription rule ACL2-COUNT.
Q.E.D.
That completes the proof of the measure theorem for TRS_ISSORT[A0].
Thus, we admit this function under the principle of definition. We
observe that the type of TRS_ISSORT[A0] is described by the theorem
(OR (EQUAL (TRS_ISSORT[A0] X) T) (EQUAL (TRS_ISSORT[A0] X) NIL)).
We used the :executable-counterpart of EQUAL and primitive type reasoning.
Summary
Form: ( DEFUN TRS_ISSORT[A0] ...)
Rules: ((:DEFINITION ACL2-COUNT)
(:DEFINITION EQ)
(:DEFINITION FIX)
(:DEFINITION NOT)
(:DEFINITION O-FINP)
(:DEFINITION O<)
(:ELIM CAR-CDR-ELIM)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART ACL2-COUNT)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART EQUAL)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART NOT)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART SYMBOLP)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-LINEAR NIL)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-TYPE-SET NIL)
(:REWRITE CAR-CONS)
(:REWRITE CDR-CONS)
(:REWRITE UNICITY-OF-0)
(:TYPE-PRESCRIPTION ACL2-COUNT))
Warnings: None
Time: 0.01 seconds (prove: 0.01, print: 0.00, other: 0.00)
TRS_ISSORT[A0]
ACL2 !>
Since TRS_ISSORT[A42] is non-recursive, its admission is trivial.
We observe that the type of TRS_ISSORT[A42] is described by the theorem
(OR (EQUAL (TRS_ISSORT[A42] X) T) (EQUAL (TRS_ISSORT[A42] X) NIL)).
We used primitive type reasoning.
Summary
Form: ( DEFUN TRS_ISSORT[A42] ...)
Rules: ((:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-TYPE-SET NIL))
Warnings: None
Time: 0.01 seconds (prove: 0.00, print: 0.00, other: 0.01)
TRS_ISSORT[A42]
ACL2 !>
For the admission of TRS_ISSORT[A24] we will use the relation O< (which
is known to be well-founded on the domain recognized by O-P) and the
measure (ACL2-COUNT X). The non-trivial part of the measure conjecture
is
Goal
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP X)
(CONSP (CDR X))
(CONSP (CDDR X))
(EQ 'TRS_CONS (CAR X))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] (CADR X)))
(O< (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X))
(ACL2-COUNT X))).
By the simple :definition EQ we reduce the conjecture to
Goal'
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP X)
(CONSP (CDR X))
(CONSP (CDDR X))
(EQUAL 'TRS_CONS (CAR X))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] (CADR X)))
(O< (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X))
(ACL2-COUNT X))).
This simplifies, using the :definitions ACL2-COUNT, FIX, O-FINP and
O<, the :executable-counterpart of ACL2-COUNT, primitive type reasoning,
the :rewrite rule UNICITY-OF-0 and the :type-prescription rule ACL2-COUNT,
to
Goal''
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP X)
(CONSP (CDR X))
(CONSP (CDDR X))
(EQUAL 'TRS_CONS (CAR X))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] (CADR X)))
(< (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X))
(+ 1 1 (ACL2-COUNT (CADR X))
(ACL2-COUNT (CDDR X))))).
The destructor terms (CAR X) and (CDR X) can be eliminated. Furthermore,
those terms are at the root of a chain of three rounds of destructor
elimination. (1) Use CAR-CDR-ELIM to replace X by (CONS X1 X2), (CAR X)
by X1 and (CDR X) by X2 and restrict the type of the new variable X1
to be that of the term it replaces. (2) Use CAR-CDR-ELIM, again, to
replace X2 by (CONS X3 X4), (CAR X2) by X3 and (CDR X2) by X4. (3)
Finally, use CAR-CDR-ELIM to replace X4 by (CONS X5 X6), (CAR X4) by
X5 and (CDR X4) by X6. These steps produce the following goal.
Goal'''
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP (CONS X5 X6))
(CONSP (LIST* X3 X5 X6))
(SYMBOLP X1)
(NOT (EQUAL X1 T))
(NOT (EQUAL X1 NIL))
(CONSP (LIST* X1 X3 X5 X6))
(EQUAL 'TRS_CONS X1)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X3))
(< (ACL2-COUNT X5)
(+ 1 1 (ACL2-COUNT X3)
(ACL2-COUNT (CONS X5 X6))))).
By case analysis we reduce the conjecture to
Goal'4'
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP (CONS X5 X6))
(CONSP (LIST* X3 X5 X6))
(SYMBOLP X1)
(NOT (EQUAL X1 T))
X1 (CONSP (LIST* X1 X3 X5 X6))
(EQUAL 'TRS_CONS X1)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X3))
(< (ACL2-COUNT X5)
(+ 1 1 (ACL2-COUNT X3)
(ACL2-COUNT (CONS X5 X6))))).
This simplifies, using the :definition ACL2-COUNT, the :executable-
counterparts of EQUAL, NOT and SYMBOLP, primitive type reasoning and
the :rewrite rules CAR-CONS and CDR-CONS, to
Goal'5'
(IMPLIES (TRS_ISSORT[A0] X3)
(< (ACL2-COUNT X5)
(+ 1 1 (ACL2-COUNT X3)
1 (ACL2-COUNT X5)
(ACL2-COUNT X6)))).
But simplification reduces this to T, using linear arithmetic, primitive
type reasoning and the :type-prescription rule ACL2-COUNT.
Q.E.D.
That completes the proof of the measure theorem for TRS_ISSORT[A24].
Thus, we admit this function under the principle of definition. We
observe that the type of TRS_ISSORT[A24] is described by the theorem
(OR (EQUAL (TRS_ISSORT[A24] X) T) (EQUAL (TRS_ISSORT[A24] X) NIL)).
We used the :executable-counterpart of EQUAL, primitive type reasoning
and the :type-prescription rule TRS_ISSORT[A0].
Summary
Form: ( DEFUN TRS_ISSORT[A24] ...)
Rules: ((:DEFINITION ACL2-COUNT)
(:DEFINITION EQ)
(:DEFINITION FIX)
(:DEFINITION NOT)
(:DEFINITION O-FINP)
(:DEFINITION O<)
(:ELIM CAR-CDR-ELIM)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART ACL2-COUNT)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART EQUAL)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART NOT)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART SYMBOLP)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-LINEAR NIL)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-TYPE-SET NIL)
(:REWRITE CAR-CONS)
(:REWRITE CDR-CONS)
(:REWRITE UNICITY-OF-0)
(:TYPE-PRESCRIPTION ACL2-COUNT)
(:TYPE-PRESCRIPTION TRS_ISSORT[A0]))
Warnings: None
Time: 0.01 seconds (prove: 0.01, print: 0.00, other: 0.00)
TRS_ISSORT[A24]
ACL2 !>
For the admission of TRS_LAST we will use the relation O< (which is
known to be well-founded on the domain recognized by O-P) and the measure
(ACL2-COUNT X0). The non-trivial part of the measure conjecture is
Goal
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A24] X0)
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR X0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQ (CAADDR X0) 'TRS_NIL)))
(AND (EQ (CAR X0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQ (CAADDR X0) 'TRS_CONS)))
(O< (ACL2-COUNT (LIST 'TRS_CONS
(CADADR (CDR X0))
(CADDAR (CDDR X0))))
(ACL2-COUNT X0))).
By the simple :definition EQ we reduce the conjecture to
Goal'
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A24] X0)
(NOT (AND (EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAADDR X0) 'TRS_NIL)))
(EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAADDR X0) 'TRS_CONS))
(O< (ACL2-COUNT (LIST 'TRS_CONS
(CADADR (CDR X0))
(CADDAR (CDDR X0))))
(ACL2-COUNT X0))).
This simplifies, using the :definitions ACL2-COUNT, FIX, O-FINP, O<
and TRS_ISSORT[A24], the :executable-counterparts of ACL2-COUNT and
EQUAL, primitive type reasoning, the :rewrite rules CAR-CONS, CDR-CONS,
COMMUTATIVITY-OF-+ and UNICITY-OF-0 and the :type-prescription rule
ACL2-COUNT, to
Goal''
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP X0)
(CONSP (CDR X0))
(CONSP (CDDR X0))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] (CADR X0))
(CONSP (CADDR X0))
(CONSP (CDADDR X0))
(CONSP (CDDADR (CDR X0)))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] (CADADR (CDR X0)))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] (CADDAR (CDDR X0)))
(NOT (CDDDAR (CDDR X0)))
(NOT (CDDDR X0))
(EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAADDR X0) 'TRS_CONS))
(< (+ 1 1 (ACL2-COUNT (CADADR (CDR X0)))
1 (ACL2-COUNT (CADDAR (CDDR X0))))
(+ 1 (ACL2-COUNT (CDR X0))))).
This simplifies, using the :definitions ACL2-COUNT and FIX, the :executable-
counterpart of ACL2-COUNT, the :rewrite rules COMMUTATIVITY-OF-+ and
UNICITY-OF-0 and the :type-prescription rule ACL2-COUNT, to
Goal'''
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP X0)
(CONSP (CDR X0))
(CONSP (CDDR X0))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] (CADR X0))
(CONSP (CADDR X0))
(CONSP (CDADDR X0))
(CONSP (CDDADR (CDR X0)))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] (CADADR (CDR X0)))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] (CADDAR (CDDR X0)))
(NOT (CDDDAR (CDDR X0)))
(NOT (CDDDR X0))
(EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAADDR X0) 'TRS_CONS))
(< (+ 1 1 (ACL2-COUNT (CADADR (CDR X0)))
1 (ACL2-COUNT (CADDAR (CDDR X0))))
(+ 1 1 (ACL2-COUNT (CADR X0))
1 1 1 (ACL2-COUNT (CADADR (CDR X0)))
1 (ACL2-COUNT (CADDAR (CDDR X0)))))).
But simplification reduces this to T, using linear arithmetic, primitive
type reasoning and the :type-prescription rule ACL2-COUNT.
Q.E.D.
That completes the proof of the measure theorem for TRS_LAST. Thus,
we admit this function under the principle of definition. We could
deduce no constraints on the type of TRS_LAST. However, in normalizing
the definition we used primitive type reasoning.
Summary
Form: ( DEFUN TRS_LAST ...)
Rules: ((:DEFINITION ACL2-COUNT)
(:DEFINITION EQ)
(:DEFINITION FIX)
(:DEFINITION NOT)
(:DEFINITION O-FINP)
(:DEFINITION O<)
(:DEFINITION TRS_ISSORT[A24])
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART ACL2-COUNT)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART EQUAL)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-LINEAR NIL)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-TYPE-SET NIL)
(:REWRITE CAR-CONS)
(:REWRITE CDR-CONS)
(:REWRITE COMMUTATIVITY-OF-+)
(:REWRITE UNICITY-OF-0)
(:TYPE-PRESCRIPTION ACL2-COUNT))
Warnings: None
Time: 0.02 seconds (prove: 0.01, print: 0.00, other: 0.01)
TRS_LAST
ACL2 !>
For the admission of TRS_EQ we will use the relation O< (which is known
to be well-founded on the domain recognized by O-P) and the measure
(ACL2-COUNT X0). The non-trivial part of the measure conjecture is
Goal
(IMPLIES (AND (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] X0)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X1))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR X0) 'TRS_0)
(EQ (CAR X1) 'TRS_0)))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR X0) 'TRS_0)
(EQ (CAR X1) 'TRS_S)))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR X0) 'TRS_S)
(EQ (CAR X1) 'TRS_0)))
T)
(O< (ACL2-COUNT (CADR X0))
(ACL2-COUNT X0))).
By the simple :definition EQ we reduce the conjecture to
Goal'
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] X0)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X1)
(NOT (AND (EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_0)
(EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_0)))
(NOT (AND (EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_0)
(EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_S)))
(NOT (AND (EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_S)
(EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_0))))
(O< (ACL2-COUNT (CADR X0))
(ACL2-COUNT X0))).
This simplifies, using the :definitions ACL2-COUNT, FIX, O-FINP, O<
and TRS_ISSORT[A0], the :executable-counterparts of ACL2-COUNT and
EQUAL, primitive type reasoning, the :rewrite rules COMMUTATIVITY-OF-+
and UNICITY-OF-0 and the :type-prescription rule ACL2-COUNT, to
Goal''
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP X0)
(CONSP (CDR X0))
(EQUAL 'TRS_S (CAR X0))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] (CADR X0))
(NOT (CDDR X0))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X1)
(NOT (EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_0)))
(< (ACL2-COUNT (CADR X0))
(+ 1 1 (ACL2-COUNT (CADR X0))))).
But simplification reduces this to T, using linear arithmetic, primitive
type reasoning and the :type-prescription rule ACL2-COUNT.
Q.E.D.
That completes the proof of the measure theorem for TRS_EQ. Thus,
we admit this function under the principle of definition. We observe
that the type of TRS_EQ is described by the theorem
(AND (CONSP (TRS_EQ X0 X1)) (TRUE-LISTP (TRS_EQ X0 X1))). We used
the :executable-counterpart of EQUAL and primitive type reasoning.
Summary
Form: ( DEFUN TRS_EQ ...)
Rules: ((:DEFINITION ACL2-COUNT)
(:DEFINITION EQ)
(:DEFINITION FIX)
(:DEFINITION NOT)
(:DEFINITION O-FINP)
(:DEFINITION O<)
(:DEFINITION TRS_ISSORT[A0])
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART ACL2-COUNT)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART EQUAL)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-LINEAR NIL)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-TYPE-SET NIL)
(:REWRITE COMMUTATIVITY-OF-+)
(:REWRITE UNICITY-OF-0)
(:TYPE-PRESCRIPTION ACL2-COUNT))
Warnings: None
Time: 0.01 seconds (prove: 0.00, print: 0.00, other: 0.01)
TRS_EQ
ACL2 !>
Since TRS_EQUAL_SORT[A42] is non-recursive, its admission is trivial.
We observe that the type of TRS_EQUAL_SORT[A42] is described by the
theorem
(AND (CONSP (TRS_EQUAL_SORT[A42] X0 X1))
(TRUE-LISTP (TRS_EQUAL_SORT[A42] X0 X1))).
Summary
Form: ( DEFUN TRS_EQUAL_SORT[A42] ...)
Rules: NIL
Warnings: None
Time: 0.00 seconds (prove: 0.00, print: 0.00, other: 0.00)
TRS_EQUAL_SORT[A42]
ACL2 !>
For the admission of TRS_EQUAL_SORT[A0] we will use the relation O<
(which is known to be well-founded on the domain recognized by O-P)
and the measure (ACL2-COUNT X0). The non-trivial part of the measure
conjecture is
Goal
(IMPLIES (AND (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] X0)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X1))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR X0) 'TRS_0)
(EQ (CAR X1) 'TRS_0)))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR X0) 'TRS_0)
(EQ (CAR X1) 'TRS_S)))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR X0) 'TRS_S)
(EQ (CAR X1) 'TRS_0)))
T)
(O< (ACL2-COUNT (CADR X0))
(ACL2-COUNT X0))).
By the simple :definition EQ we reduce the conjecture to
Goal'
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] X0)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X1)
(NOT (AND (EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_0)
(EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_0)))
(NOT (AND (EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_0)
(EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_S)))
(NOT (AND (EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_S)
(EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_0))))
(O< (ACL2-COUNT (CADR X0))
(ACL2-COUNT X0))).
This simplifies, using the :definitions ACL2-COUNT, FIX, O-FINP, O<
and TRS_ISSORT[A0], the :executable-counterparts of ACL2-COUNT and
EQUAL, primitive type reasoning, the :rewrite rules COMMUTATIVITY-OF-+
and UNICITY-OF-0 and the :type-prescription rule ACL2-COUNT, to
Goal''
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP X0)
(CONSP (CDR X0))
(EQUAL 'TRS_S (CAR X0))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] (CADR X0))
(NOT (CDDR X0))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X1)
(NOT (EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_0)))
(< (ACL2-COUNT (CADR X0))
(+ 1 1 (ACL2-COUNT (CADR X0))))).
But simplification reduces this to T, using linear arithmetic, primitive
type reasoning and the :type-prescription rule ACL2-COUNT.
Q.E.D.
That completes the proof of the measure theorem for TRS_EQUAL_SORT[A0].
Thus, we admit this function under the principle of definition. We
observe that the type of TRS_EQUAL_SORT[A0] is described by the theorem
(AND (CONSP (TRS_EQUAL_SORT[A0] X0 X1))
(TRUE-LISTP (TRS_EQUAL_SORT[A0] X0 X1))).
We used the :executable-counterpart of EQUAL and primitive type reasoning.
Summary
Form: ( DEFUN TRS_EQUAL_SORT[A0] ...)
Rules: ((:DEFINITION ACL2-COUNT)
(:DEFINITION EQ)
(:DEFINITION FIX)
(:DEFINITION NOT)
(:DEFINITION O-FINP)
(:DEFINITION O<)
(:DEFINITION TRS_ISSORT[A0])
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART ACL2-COUNT)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART EQUAL)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-LINEAR NIL)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-TYPE-SET NIL)
(:REWRITE COMMUTATIVITY-OF-+)
(:REWRITE UNICITY-OF-0)
(:TYPE-PRESCRIPTION ACL2-COUNT))
Warnings: None
Time: 0.01 seconds (prove: 0.01, print: 0.00, other: 0.00)
TRS_EQUAL_SORT[A0]
ACL2 !>
Since TRS_ISA_FALSE is non-recursive, its admission is trivial. We
observe that the type of TRS_ISA_FALSE is described by the theorem
(AND (CONSP (TRS_ISA_FALSE X0)) (TRUE-LISTP (TRS_ISA_FALSE X0))).
Summary
Form: ( DEFUN TRS_ISA_FALSE ...)
Rules: NIL
Warnings: None
Time: 0.00 seconds (prove: 0.00, print: 0.00, other: 0.00)
TRS_ISA_FALSE
ACL2 !>
Since TRS_ISA_TRUE is non-recursive, its admission is trivial. We
observe that the type of TRS_ISA_TRUE is described by the theorem
(AND (CONSP (TRS_ISA_TRUE X0)) (TRUE-LISTP (TRS_ISA_TRUE X0))).
Summary
Form: ( DEFUN TRS_ISA_TRUE ...)
Rules: NIL
Warnings: None
Time: 0.00 seconds (prove: 0.00, print: 0.00, other: 0.00)
TRS_ISA_TRUE
ACL2 !>
Since TRS_NOT is non-recursive, its admission is trivial. We observe
that the type of TRS_NOT is described by the theorem
(AND (CONSP (TRS_NOT X0)) (TRUE-LISTP (TRS_NOT X0))).
Summary
Form: ( DEFUN TRS_NOT ...)
Rules: NIL
Warnings: None
Time: 0.00 seconds (prove: 0.00, print: 0.00, other: 0.00)
TRS_NOT
ACL2 !>
Since TRS_OR is non-recursive, its admission is trivial. We observe
that the type of TRS_OR is described by the theorem
(OR (AND (CONSP (TRS_OR X0 X1))
(TRUE-LISTP (TRS_OR X0 X1)))
(EQUAL (TRS_OR X0 X1) X1)).
Summary
Form: ( DEFUN TRS_OR ...)
Rules: NIL
Warnings: None
Time: 0.00 seconds (prove: 0.00, print: 0.00, other: 0.00)
TRS_OR
ACL2 !>
Since TRS_AND is non-recursive, its admission is trivial. We observe
that the type of TRS_AND is described by the theorem
(OR (AND (CONSP (TRS_AND X0 X1))
(TRUE-LISTP (TRS_AND X0 X1)))
(EQUAL (TRS_AND X0 X1) X1)).
Summary
Form: ( DEFUN TRS_AND ...)
Rules: NIL
Warnings: None
Time: 0.00 seconds (prove: 0.00, print: 0.00, other: 0.00)
TRS_AND
ACL2 !>
Since TRS_EQUAL_BOOL is non-recursive, its admission is trivial. We
observe that the type of TRS_EQUAL_BOOL is described by the theorem
(AND (CONSP (TRS_EQUAL_BOOL X0 X1)) (TRUE-LISTP (TRS_EQUAL_BOOL X0 X1))).
We used the :executable-counterpart of EQUAL and primitive type reasoning.
Summary
Form: ( DEFUN TRS_EQUAL_BOOL ...)
Rules: ((:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART EQUAL)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-TYPE-SET NIL))
Warnings: None
Time: 0.00 seconds (prove: 0.00, print: 0.00, other: 0.00)
TRS_EQUAL_BOOL
ACL2 !>
For the admission of TRS_IF we will use the relation O< (which is known
to be well-founded on the domain recognized by O-P) and the measure
(ACL2-COUNT X3). The non-trivial part of the measure conjecture is
Goal
(IMPLIES (AND (AND (TRS_ISBOOL X0)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X1)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X2)
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] X3))
(NOT (EQ (CAR X0) 'TRS_TRUE))
(AND (EQ (CAR X0) 'TRS_FALSE)
(EQ (CAR X3) 'TRS_CONS)))
(O< (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X3))
(ACL2-COUNT X3))).
By the simple :definitions EQ and TRS_ISBOOL we reduce the conjecture
to
Goal'
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP X0)
(COND ((EQUAL 'TRS_TRUE (CAR X0))
(EQUAL (CDR X0) NIL))
((EQUAL 'TRS_FALSE (CAR X0))
(EQUAL (CDR X0) NIL))
(T NIL))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X1)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X2)
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] X3)
(NOT (EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_TRUE))
(EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_FALSE)
(EQUAL (CAR X3) 'TRS_CONS))
(O< (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X3))
(ACL2-COUNT X3))).
This simplifies, using the :definitions ACL2-COUNT, FIX, O-FINP, O<
and TRS_ISSORT[A24], the :executable-counterparts of ACL2-COUNT and
EQUAL, primitive type reasoning, the :rewrite rule UNICITY-OF-0 and
the :type-prescription rule ACL2-COUNT, to
Goal''
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP X0)
(NOT (CDR X0))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X1)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X2)
(CONSP X3)
(CONSP (CDR X3))
(CONSP (CDDR X3))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] (CADR X3))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] (CADDR X3))
(NOT (CDDDR X3))
(EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_FALSE)
(EQUAL (CAR X3) 'TRS_CONS))
(< (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X3))
(+ 1 (ACL2-COUNT (CDR X3))))).
This simplifies, using the :definitions ACL2-COUNT and FIX, the :executable-
counterpart of ACL2-COUNT, the :rewrite rules COMMUTATIVITY-OF-+ and
UNICITY-OF-0 and the :type-prescription rule ACL2-COUNT, to
Goal'''
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP X0)
(NOT (CDR X0))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X1)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X2)
(CONSP X3)
(CONSP (CDR X3))
(CONSP (CDDR X3))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] (CADR X3))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] (CADDR X3))
(NOT (CDDDR X3))
(EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_FALSE)
(EQUAL (CAR X3) 'TRS_CONS))
(< (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X3))
(+ 1 1 (ACL2-COUNT (CADR X3))
1 (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X3))))).
But simplification reduces this to T, using linear arithmetic, primitive
type reasoning and the :type-prescription rule ACL2-COUNT.
Q.E.D.
That completes the proof of the measure theorem for TRS_IF. Thus,
we admit this function under the principle of definition. We observe
that the type of TRS_IF is described by the theorem
(OR (AND (CONSP (TRS_IF X0 X1 X2 X3))
(TRUE-LISTP (TRS_IF X0 X1 X2 X3)))
(EQUAL (TRS_IF X0 X1 X2 X3) X3)).
We used primitive type reasoning.
Summary
Form: ( DEFUN TRS_IF ...)
Rules: ((:DEFINITION ACL2-COUNT)
(:DEFINITION EQ)
(:DEFINITION FIX)
(:DEFINITION NOT)
(:DEFINITION O-FINP)
(:DEFINITION O<)
(:DEFINITION TRS_ISBOOL)
(:DEFINITION TRS_ISSORT[A24])
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART ACL2-COUNT)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART EQUAL)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-LINEAR NIL)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-TYPE-SET NIL)
(:REWRITE COMMUTATIVITY-OF-+)
(:REWRITE UNICITY-OF-0)
(:TYPE-PRESCRIPTION ACL2-COUNT))
Warnings: None
Time: 0.02 seconds (prove: 0.01, print: 0.00, other: 0.01)
TRS_IF
ACL2 !>
For the admission of TRS_IFPRIME we will use the relation O< (which
is known to be well-founded on the domain recognized by O-P) and the
measure (ACL2-COUNT X3). The non-trivial part of the measure conjecture
is
Goal
(IMPLIES (AND (AND (TRS_ISBOOL X0)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X1)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X2)
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] X3))
(NOT (EQ (CAR X0) 'TRS_TRUE))
(AND (EQ (CAR X0) 'TRS_FALSE)
(EQ (CAR X3) 'TRS_CONS)))
(O< (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X3))
(ACL2-COUNT X3))).
By the simple :definitions EQ and TRS_ISBOOL we reduce the conjecture
to
Goal'
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP X0)
(COND ((EQUAL 'TRS_TRUE (CAR X0))
(EQUAL (CDR X0) NIL))
((EQUAL 'TRS_FALSE (CAR X0))
(EQUAL (CDR X0) NIL))
(T NIL))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X1)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X2)
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] X3)
(NOT (EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_TRUE))
(EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_FALSE)
(EQUAL (CAR X3) 'TRS_CONS))
(O< (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X3))
(ACL2-COUNT X3))).
This simplifies, using the :definitions ACL2-COUNT, FIX, O-FINP, O<
and TRS_ISSORT[A24], the :executable-counterparts of ACL2-COUNT and
EQUAL, primitive type reasoning, the :rewrite rule UNICITY-OF-0 and
the :type-prescription rule ACL2-COUNT, to
Goal''
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP X0)
(NOT (CDR X0))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X1)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X2)
(CONSP X3)
(CONSP (CDR X3))
(CONSP (CDDR X3))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] (CADR X3))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] (CADDR X3))
(NOT (CDDDR X3))
(EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_FALSE)
(EQUAL (CAR X3) 'TRS_CONS))
(< (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X3))
(+ 1 (ACL2-COUNT (CDR X3))))).
This simplifies, using the :definitions ACL2-COUNT and FIX, the :executable-
counterpart of ACL2-COUNT, the :rewrite rules COMMUTATIVITY-OF-+ and
UNICITY-OF-0 and the :type-prescription rule ACL2-COUNT, to
Goal'''
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP X0)
(NOT (CDR X0))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X1)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X2)
(CONSP X3)
(CONSP (CDR X3))
(CONSP (CDDR X3))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] (CADR X3))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] (CADDR X3))
(NOT (CDDDR X3))
(EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_FALSE)
(EQUAL (CAR X3) 'TRS_CONS))
(< (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X3))
(+ 1 1 (ACL2-COUNT (CADR X3))
1 (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X3))))).
But simplification reduces this to T, using linear arithmetic, primitive
type reasoning and the :type-prescription rule ACL2-COUNT.
Q.E.D.
That completes the proof of the measure theorem for TRS_IFPRIME. Thus,
we admit this function under the principle of definition. We observe
that the type of TRS_IFPRIME is described by the theorem
(AND (CONSP (TRS_IFPRIME X0 X1 X2 X3))
(TRUE-LISTP (TRS_IFPRIME X0 X1 X2 X3))).
Summary
Form: ( DEFUN TRS_IFPRIME ...)
Rules: ((:DEFINITION ACL2-COUNT)
(:DEFINITION EQ)
(:DEFINITION FIX)
(:DEFINITION NOT)
(:DEFINITION O-FINP)
(:DEFINITION O<)
(:DEFINITION TRS_ISBOOL)
(:DEFINITION TRS_ISSORT[A24])
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART ACL2-COUNT)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART EQUAL)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-LINEAR NIL)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-TYPE-SET NIL)
(:REWRITE COMMUTATIVITY-OF-+)
(:REWRITE UNICITY-OF-0)
(:TYPE-PRESCRIPTION ACL2-COUNT))
Warnings: None
Time: 0.02 seconds (prove: 0.01, print: 0.00, other: 0.01)
TRS_IFPRIME
ACL2 !>
For the admission of TRS_DEL we will use the relation O< (which is
known to be well-founded on the domain recognized by O-P) and the measure
(ACL2-COUNT X1). The non-trivial part of the measure conjecture is
Goal
(IMPLIES (AND (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] X0)
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] X1))
(NOT (EQ (CAR X1) 'TRS_NIL))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR X1) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQ (TRS_EQUAL_BOOL (TRS_EQ X0 (CADR X1))
'(TRS_TRUE))
'(TRS_TRUE))))
(EQ (TRS_EQUAL_BOOL (TRS_EQ X0 (CADR X1))
'(TRS_TRUE))
'(TRS_FALSE)))
(O< (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X1))
(ACL2-COUNT X1))).
By the simple :definition EQ we reduce the conjecture to
Goal'
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] X0)
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] X1)
(NOT (EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_NIL))
(NOT (AND (EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (TRS_EQUAL_BOOL (TRS_EQ X0 (CADR X1))
'(TRS_TRUE))
'(TRS_TRUE))))
(EQUAL (TRS_EQUAL_BOOL (TRS_EQ X0 (CADR X1))
'(TRS_TRUE))
'(TRS_FALSE)))
(O< (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X1))
(ACL2-COUNT X1))).
This simplifies, using the :definitions ACL2-COUNT, FIX, O-FINP, O<,
TRS_EQUAL_BOOL, TRS_ISBOOL and TRS_ISSORT[A24], the :executable-counterparts
of ACL2-COUNT, CAR, EQUAL and TRS_ISBOOL, primitive type reasoning,
the :rewrite rules COMMUTATIVITY-OF-+ and UNICITY-OF-0 and the :type-
prescription rules ACL2-COUNT and TRS_EQ, to
Goal''
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] X0)
(CONSP X1)
(CONSP (CDR X1))
(CONSP (CDDR X1))
(EQUAL 'TRS_CONS (CAR X1))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] (CADR X1))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] (CADDR X1))
(NOT (CDDDR X1))
(EQUAL 'TRS_FALSE
(CAR (TRS_EQ X0 (CADR X1))))
(NOT (CDR (TRS_EQ X0 (CADR X1)))))
(< (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X1))
(+ 1 1 (ACL2-COUNT (CADR X1))
1 (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X1))))).
But simplification reduces this to T, using linear arithmetic, primitive
type reasoning and the :type-prescription rule ACL2-COUNT.
Q.E.D.
That completes the proof of the measure theorem for TRS_DEL. Thus,
we admit this function under the principle of definition. We could
deduce no constraints on the type of TRS_DEL.
Summary
Form: ( DEFUN TRS_DEL ...)
Rules: ((:DEFINITION ACL2-COUNT)
(:DEFINITION EQ)
(:DEFINITION FIX)
(:DEFINITION NOT)
(:DEFINITION O-FINP)
(:DEFINITION O<)
(:DEFINITION TRS_EQUAL_BOOL)
(:DEFINITION TRS_ISBOOL)
(:DEFINITION TRS_ISSORT[A24])
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART ACL2-COUNT)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART CAR)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART EQUAL)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART TRS_ISBOOL)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-LINEAR NIL)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-TYPE-SET NIL)
(:REWRITE COMMUTATIVITY-OF-+)
(:REWRITE UNICITY-OF-0)
(:TYPE-PRESCRIPTION ACL2-COUNT)
(:TYPE-PRESCRIPTION TRS_EQ))
Warnings: None
Time: 0.01 seconds (prove: 0.00, print: 0.00, other: 0.01)
TRS_DEL
ACL2 !>
For the admission of TRS_DELPRIME we will use the relation O< (which
is known to be well-founded on the domain recognized by O-P) and the
measure (ACL2-COUNT X1). The non-trivial part of the measure conjecture
is
Goal
(IMPLIES (AND (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] X0)
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] X1))
(NOT (EQ (CAR X1) 'TRS_NIL))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR X1) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQ (TRS_EQUAL_BOOL (TRS_EQ X0 (CADR X1))
'(TRS_TRUE))
'(TRS_TRUE))))
(EQ (TRS_EQUAL_BOOL (TRS_EQ X0 (CADR X1))
'(TRS_TRUE))
'(TRS_FALSE)))
(O< (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X1))
(ACL2-COUNT X1))).
By the simple :definition EQ we reduce the conjecture to
Goal'
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] X0)
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] X1)
(NOT (EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_NIL))
(NOT (AND (EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (TRS_EQUAL_BOOL (TRS_EQ X0 (CADR X1))
'(TRS_TRUE))
'(TRS_TRUE))))
(EQUAL (TRS_EQUAL_BOOL (TRS_EQ X0 (CADR X1))
'(TRS_TRUE))
'(TRS_FALSE)))
(O< (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X1))
(ACL2-COUNT X1))).
This simplifies, using the :definitions ACL2-COUNT, FIX, O-FINP, O<,
TRS_EQUAL_BOOL, TRS_ISBOOL and TRS_ISSORT[A24], the :executable-counterparts
of ACL2-COUNT, CAR, EQUAL and TRS_ISBOOL, primitive type reasoning,
the :rewrite rules COMMUTATIVITY-OF-+ and UNICITY-OF-0 and the :type-
prescription rules ACL2-COUNT and TRS_EQ, to
Goal''
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] X0)
(CONSP X1)
(CONSP (CDR X1))
(CONSP (CDDR X1))
(EQUAL 'TRS_CONS (CAR X1))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] (CADR X1))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] (CADDR X1))
(NOT (CDDDR X1))
(EQUAL 'TRS_FALSE
(CAR (TRS_EQ X0 (CADR X1))))
(NOT (CDR (TRS_EQ X0 (CADR X1)))))
(< (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X1))
(+ 1 1 (ACL2-COUNT (CADR X1))
1 (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X1))))).
But simplification reduces this to T, using linear arithmetic, primitive
type reasoning and the :type-prescription rule ACL2-COUNT.
Q.E.D.
That completes the proof of the measure theorem for TRS_DELPRIME.
Thus, we admit this function under the principle of definition. We
observe that the type of TRS_DELPRIME is described by the theorem
(AND (CONSP (TRS_DELPRIME X0 X1)) (TRUE-LISTP (TRS_DELPRIME X0 X1))).
Summary
Form: ( DEFUN TRS_DELPRIME ...)
Rules: ((:DEFINITION ACL2-COUNT)
(:DEFINITION EQ)
(:DEFINITION FIX)
(:DEFINITION NOT)
(:DEFINITION O-FINP)
(:DEFINITION O<)
(:DEFINITION TRS_EQUAL_BOOL)
(:DEFINITION TRS_ISBOOL)
(:DEFINITION TRS_ISSORT[A24])
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART ACL2-COUNT)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART CAR)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART EQUAL)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART TRS_ISBOOL)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-LINEAR NIL)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-TYPE-SET NIL)
(:REWRITE COMMUTATIVITY-OF-+)
(:REWRITE UNICITY-OF-0)
(:TYPE-PRESCRIPTION ACL2-COUNT)
(:TYPE-PRESCRIPTION TRS_EQ))
Warnings: None
Time: 0.01 seconds (prove: 0.00, print: 0.00, other: 0.01)
TRS_DELPRIME
ACL2 !>
For the admission of TRS_EQUAL_SORT[A24] we will use the relation O<
(which is known to be well-founded on the domain recognized by O-P)
and the measure (ACL2-COUNT X0). The non-trivial part of the measure
conjecture is
Goal
(AND (IMPLIES (AND (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A24] X0)
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] X1))
(AND (EQ (CAR X0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQ (CAR X1) 'TRS_CONS)))
(O< (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X0))
(ACL2-COUNT X0)))
(IMPLIES (AND (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A24] X0)
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] X1))
(AND (EQ (CAR X0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQ (CAR X1) 'TRS_CONS)))
(O< (ACL2-COUNT (CADR X0))
(ACL2-COUNT X0)))).
By the simple :definition EQ we reduce the conjecture to the following
two conjectures.
Subgoal 2
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A24] X0)
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] X1)
(EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_CONS))
(O< (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X0))
(ACL2-COUNT X0))).
This simplifies, using the :definitions ACL2-COUNT, FIX, O-FINP, O<
and TRS_ISSORT[A24], the :executable-counterparts of ACL2-COUNT and
EQUAL, primitive type reasoning, the :rewrite rule UNICITY-OF-0 and
the :type-prescription rule ACL2-COUNT, to
Subgoal 2'
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP X0)
(CONSP (CDR X0))
(CONSP (CDDR X0))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] (CADR X0))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] (CADDR X0))
(NOT (CDDDR X0))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] X1)
(EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_CONS))
(< (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X0))
(+ 1 (ACL2-COUNT (CDR X0))))).
This simplifies, using the :definitions ACL2-COUNT and FIX, the :executable-
counterpart of ACL2-COUNT, the :rewrite rules COMMUTATIVITY-OF-+ and
UNICITY-OF-0 and the :type-prescription rule ACL2-COUNT, to
Subgoal 2''
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP X0)
(CONSP (CDR X0))
(CONSP (CDDR X0))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] (CADR X0))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] (CADDR X0))
(NOT (CDDDR X0))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] X1)
(EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_CONS))
(< (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X0))
(+ 1 1 (ACL2-COUNT (CADR X0))
1 (ACL2-COUNT (CADDR X0))))).
But simplification reduces this to T, using linear arithmetic, primitive
type reasoning and the :type-prescription rule ACL2-COUNT.
Subgoal 1
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A24] X0)
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] X1)
(EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_CONS))
(O< (ACL2-COUNT (CADR X0))
(ACL2-COUNT X0))).
This simplifies, using the :definitions O-FINP and O< and the :type-
prescription rule ACL2-COUNT, to
Subgoal 1'
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A24] X0)
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] X1)
(EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_CONS))
(< (ACL2-COUNT (CADR X0))
(ACL2-COUNT X0))).
The destructor terms (CAR X0) and (CDR X0) can be eliminated. Furthermore,
those terms are at the root of a chain of two rounds of destructor
elimination. (1) Use CAR-CDR-ELIM to replace X0 by (CONS X2 X3), (CAR X0)
by X2 and (CDR X0) by X3 and restrict the type of the new variable
X2 to be that of the term it replaces. (2) Use CAR-CDR-ELIM, again,
to replace X3 by (CONS X4 X5), (CAR X3) by X4 and (CDR X3) by X5.
These steps produce the following three goals.
Subgoal 1.3
(IMPLIES (AND (NOT (CONSP X0))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] X0)
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] X1)
(EQUAL (CAR X0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_CONS))
(< (ACL2-COUNT (CADR X0))
(ACL2-COUNT X0))).
But we reduce the conjecture to T, by primitive type reasoning.
Subgoal 1.2
(IMPLIES (AND (NOT (CONSP X3))
(SYMBOLP X2)
(NOT (EQUAL X2 T))
(NOT (EQUAL X2 NIL))
(CONSP (CONS X2 X3))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] (CONS X2 X3))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] X1)
(EQUAL X2 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_CONS))
(< (ACL2-COUNT (CAR X3))
(ACL2-COUNT (CONS X2 X3)))).
By case analysis we reduce the conjecture to
Subgoal 1.2'
(IMPLIES (AND (NOT (CONSP X3))
(SYMBOLP X2)
(NOT (EQUAL X2 T))
X2 (CONSP (CONS X2 X3))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] (CONS X2 X3))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] X1)
(EQUAL X2 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_CONS))
(< (ACL2-COUNT (CAR X3))
(ACL2-COUNT (CONS X2 X3)))).
But simplification reduces this to T, using the :definition TRS_ISSORT[A24],
the :executable-counterparts of EQUAL, NOT and SYMBOLP, primitive type
reasoning and the :rewrite rules CAR-CONS and CDR-CONS.
Subgoal 1.1
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP (CONS X4 X5))
(SYMBOLP X2)
(NOT (EQUAL X2 T))
(NOT (EQUAL X2 NIL))
(CONSP (LIST* X2 X4 X5))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] (LIST* X2 X4 X5))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] X1)
(EQUAL X2 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_CONS))
(< (ACL2-COUNT X4)
(ACL2-COUNT (LIST* X2 X4 X5)))).
By case analysis we reduce the conjecture to
Subgoal 1.1'
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP (CONS X4 X5))
(SYMBOLP X2)
(NOT (EQUAL X2 T))
X2 (CONSP (LIST* X2 X4 X5))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] (LIST* X2 X4 X5))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] X1)
(EQUAL X2 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_CONS))
(< (ACL2-COUNT X4)
(ACL2-COUNT (LIST* X2 X4 X5)))).
This simplifies, using the :definitions ACL2-COUNT, FIX and TRS_ISSORT[A24],
the :executable-counterparts of ACL2-COUNT, EQUAL, NOT and SYMBOLP,
primitive type reasoning, the :rewrite rules CAR-CONS, CDR-CONS and
UNICITY-OF-0 and the :type-prescription rule ACL2-COUNT, to
Subgoal 1.1''
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP X5)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] X4)
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] (CAR X5))
(NOT (CDR X5))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] X1)
(EQUAL (CAR X1) 'TRS_CONS))
(< (ACL2-COUNT X4)
(+ 1 1 (ACL2-COUNT X4)
(ACL2-COUNT X5)))).
But simplification reduces this to T, using linear arithmetic, primitive
type reasoning and the :type-prescription rule ACL2-COUNT.
Q.E.D.
That completes the proof of the measure theorem for TRS_EQUAL_SORT[A24].
Thus, we admit this function under the principle of definition. We
observe that the type of TRS_EQUAL_SORT[A24] is described by the theorem
(AND (CONSP (TRS_EQUAL_SORT[A24] X0 X1))
(TRUE-LISTP (TRS_EQUAL_SORT[A24] X0 X1))).
We used the :executable-counterpart of EQUAL, primitive type reasoning
and the :type-prescription rule TRS_AND.
Summary
Form: ( DEFUN TRS_EQUAL_SORT[A24] ...)
Rules: ((:DEFINITION ACL2-COUNT)
(:DEFINITION EQ)
(:DEFINITION FIX)
(:DEFINITION NOT)
(:DEFINITION O-FINP)
(:DEFINITION O<)
(:DEFINITION TRS_ISSORT[A24])
(:ELIM CAR-CDR-ELIM)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART ACL2-COUNT)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART EQUAL)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART NOT)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART SYMBOLP)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-LINEAR NIL)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-TYPE-SET NIL)
(:REWRITE CAR-CONS)
(:REWRITE CDR-CONS)
(:REWRITE COMMUTATIVITY-OF-+)
(:REWRITE UNICITY-OF-0)
(:TYPE-PRESCRIPTION ACL2-COUNT)
(:TYPE-PRESCRIPTION TRS_AND))
Warnings: None
Time: 0.02 seconds (prove: 0.01, print: 0.00, other: 0.01)
TRS_EQUAL_SORT[A24]
ACL2 !>
[Note: A hint was supplied for our processing of the goal above.
Thanks!]
By the simple :definition EQ we reduce the conjecture to
Goal'
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A24] TRS_Z0)
(NOT (EQUAL TRS_Z0 '(TRS_NIL))))
(EQUAL (TRS_DELPRIME (TRS_LAST TRS_Z0) TRS_Z0)
'(TRS_TRUE))).
Name the formula above *1.
Perhaps we can prove *1 by induction. Three induction schemes are
suggested by this conjecture. These merge into two derived induction
schemes. By considering those suggested by the largest number of non-
primitive recursive functions, we narrow the field to one.
We will induct according to a scheme suggested by (TRS_LAST TRS_Z0).
This suggestion was produced using the :induction rule TRS_LAST. If
we let (:P TRS_Z0) denote *1 above then the induction scheme we'll
use is
(AND (IMPLIES (NOT (TRS_ISSORT[A24] TRS_Z0))
(:P TRS_Z0))
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A24] TRS_Z0)
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQ (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_NIL)))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQ (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)))
T)
(:P TRS_Z0))
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A24] TRS_Z0)
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQ (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_NIL)))
(AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQ (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS))
(:P (LIST 'TRS_CONS
(CADADR (CDR TRS_Z0))
(CADDAR (CDDR TRS_Z0)))))
(:P TRS_Z0))
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A24] TRS_Z0)
(AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQ (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_NIL)))
(:P TRS_Z0))).
This induction is justified by the same argument used to admit TRS_LAST.
When applied to the goal at hand the above induction scheme produces
five nontautological subgoals.
Subgoal *1/5
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A24] TRS_Z0)
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQ (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_NIL)))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQ (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)))
T (NOT (EQUAL TRS_Z0 '(TRS_NIL))))
(EQUAL (TRS_DELPRIME (TRS_LAST TRS_Z0) TRS_Z0)
'(TRS_TRUE))).
By the simple :definition EQ we reduce the conjecture to
Subgoal *1/5'
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A24] TRS_Z0)
(NOT (AND (EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_NIL)))
(NOT (AND (EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)))
(NOT (EQUAL TRS_Z0 '(TRS_NIL))))
(EQUAL (TRS_DELPRIME (TRS_LAST TRS_Z0) TRS_Z0)
'(TRS_TRUE))).
This simplifies, using the :definitions TRS_ISSORT[A24] and TRS_LAST,
the :executable-counterparts of CAR, CDR and EQUAL, primitive type
reasoning and the :type-prescription rules TRS_ISSORT[A0] and
TRS_ISSORT[A24], to
Subgoal *1/5''
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP TRS_Z0)
(CONSP (CDR TRS_Z0))
(CONSP (CDDR TRS_Z0))
(EQUAL 'TRS_CONS (CAR TRS_Z0))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] (CADR TRS_Z0))
(TRS_ISSORT[A24] (CADDR TRS_Z0))
(NOT (CDDDR TRS_Z0))
(NOT (EQUAL (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_NIL))
(NOT (EQUAL (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)))
(EQUAL (TRS_DELPRIME '(TRS_0) TRS_Z0)
'(TRS_TRUE))).
But simplification reduces this to T, using the :definition TRS_ISSORT[A24].
Subgoal *1/4
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A24] TRS_Z0)
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQ (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_NIL)))
(AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQ (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS))
(EQUAL (TRS_DELPRIME (TRS_LAST (LIST 'TRS_CONS
(CADADR (CDR TRS_Z0))
(CADDAR (CDDR TRS_Z0))))
(LIST 'TRS_CONS
(CADADR (CDR TRS_Z0))
(CADDAR (CDDR TRS_Z0))))
'(TRS_TRUE))
(NOT (EQUAL TRS_Z0 '(TRS_NIL))))
(EQUAL (TRS_DELPRIME (TRS_LAST TRS_Z0) TRS_Z0)
'(TRS_TRUE))).
By the simple :definition EQ we reduce the conjecture to
Subgoal *1/4'
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A24] TRS_Z0)
(NOT (AND (EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_NIL)))
(EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (TRS_DELPRIME (TRS_LAST (LIST 'TRS_CONS
(CADADR (CDR TRS_Z0))
(CADDAR (CDDR TRS_Z0))))
(LIST 'TRS_CONS
(CADADR (CDR TRS_Z0))
(CADDAR (CDDR TRS_Z0))))
'(TRS_TRUE))
(NOT (EQUAL TRS_Z0 '(TRS_NIL))))
(EQUAL (TRS_DELPRIME (TRS_LAST TRS_Z0) TRS_Z0)
'(TRS_TRUE))).
But simplification reduces this to T, using the :definitions TRS_DELPRIME,
TRS_EQUAL_BOOL, TRS_ISBOOL, TRS_ISSORT[A24] and TRS_LAST, the :executable-
counterparts of CAR, EQUAL and TRS_ISBOOL, primitive type reasoning,
the :rewrite rules CAR-CONS and CDR-CONS and the :type-prescription
rules TRS_EQ, TRS_ISSORT[A0] and TRS_ISSORT[A24].
Subgoal *1/3
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A24] TRS_Z0)
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQ (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_NIL)))
(AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQ (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS))
(EQUAL (LIST 'TRS_CONS
(CADADR (CDR TRS_Z0))
(CADDAR (CDDR TRS_Z0)))
'(TRS_NIL))
(NOT (EQUAL TRS_Z0 '(TRS_NIL))))
(EQUAL (TRS_DELPRIME (TRS_LAST TRS_Z0) TRS_Z0)
'(TRS_TRUE))).
But we reduce the conjecture to T, by the simple :definition EQ and
the simple :rewrite rule CONS-EQUAL.
Subgoal *1/2
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A24] TRS_Z0)
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQ (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_NIL)))
(AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQ (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS))
(NOT (TRS_ISSORT[A24] (LIST 'TRS_CONS
(CADADR (CDR TRS_Z0))
(CADDAR (CDDR TRS_Z0)))))
(NOT (EQUAL TRS_Z0 '(TRS_NIL))))
(EQUAL (TRS_DELPRIME (TRS_LAST TRS_Z0) TRS_Z0)
'(TRS_TRUE))).
By the simple :definition EQ we reduce the conjecture to
Subgoal *1/2'
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A24] TRS_Z0)
(NOT (AND (EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_NIL)))
(EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(NOT (TRS_ISSORT[A24] (LIST 'TRS_CONS
(CADADR (CDR TRS_Z0))
(CADDAR (CDDR TRS_Z0)))))
(NOT (EQUAL TRS_Z0 '(TRS_NIL))))
(EQUAL (TRS_DELPRIME (TRS_LAST TRS_Z0) TRS_Z0)
'(TRS_TRUE))).
But simplification reduces this to T, using the :definition TRS_ISSORT[A24],
the :executable-counterpart of EQUAL, primitive type reasoning, the
:rewrite rules CAR-CONS and CDR-CONS and the :type-prescription rules
TRS_ISSORT[A0] and TRS_ISSORT[A24].
Subgoal *1/1
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A24] TRS_Z0)
(AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQ (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_NIL))
(NOT (EQUAL TRS_Z0 '(TRS_NIL))))
(EQUAL (TRS_DELPRIME (TRS_LAST TRS_Z0) TRS_Z0)
'(TRS_TRUE))).
By the simple :definition EQ we reduce the conjecture to
Subgoal *1/1'
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A24] TRS_Z0)
(EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_NIL)
(NOT (EQUAL TRS_Z0 '(TRS_NIL))))
(EQUAL (TRS_DELPRIME (TRS_LAST TRS_Z0) TRS_Z0)
'(TRS_TRUE))).
This simplifies, using the :definitions TRS_ISSORT[A24] and TRS_LAST,
the :executable-counterparts of CAR, CONSP and EQUAL, primitive type
reasoning and the :type-prescription rules TRS_ISSORT[A0] and
TRS_ISSORT[A24], to
Subgoal *1/1''
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP TRS_Z0)
(CONSP (CDR TRS_Z0))
(CONSP (CDDR TRS_Z0))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] (CADR TRS_Z0))
(CONSP (CADDR TRS_Z0))
(NOT (CONSP (CDADDR TRS_Z0)))
(NOT (CDADDR TRS_Z0))
(NOT (CDDDR TRS_Z0))
(EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_NIL))
(EQUAL (TRS_DELPRIME (CADR TRS_Z0) TRS_Z0)
'(TRS_TRUE))).
This simplifies, using the :definitions TRS_DELPRIME, TRS_EQUAL_BOOL,
TRS_ISBOOL and TRS_ISSORT[A24], the :executable-counterparts of CAR,
CONSP, EQUAL and TRS_ISBOOL, primitive type reasoning and the :type-
prescription rules TRS_EQ, TRS_ISSORT[A0] and TRS_ISSORT[A24], to
Subgoal *1/1'''
(IMPLIES (AND (CONSP TRS_Z0)
(CONSP (CDR TRS_Z0))
(CONSP (CDDR TRS_Z0))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] (CADR TRS_Z0))
(CONSP (CADDR TRS_Z0))
(NOT (CDADDR TRS_Z0))
(NOT (CDDDR TRS_Z0))
(EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL (CAADDR TRS_Z0) 'TRS_NIL)
(EQUAL 'TRS_FALSE
(CAR (TRS_EQ (CADR TRS_Z0) (CADR TRS_Z0)))))
(CDR (TRS_EQ (CADR TRS_Z0) (CADR TRS_Z0)))).
The destructor terms (CAR TRS_Z0) and (CDR TRS_Z0) can be eliminated.
Furthermore, those terms are at the root of a chain of four rounds
of destructor elimination. (1) Use CAR-CDR-ELIM to replace TRS_Z0 by
(CONS TRS_Z1 TRS_Z2), (CAR TRS_Z0) by TRS_Z1 and (CDR TRS_Z0) by TRS_Z2
and restrict the type of the new variable TRS_Z1 to be that of the
term it replaces. (2) Use CAR-CDR-ELIM, again, to replace TRS_Z2 by
(CONS TRS_Z3 TRS_Z4), (CAR TRS_Z2) by TRS_Z3 and (CDR TRS_Z2) by TRS_Z4.
(3) Use CAR-CDR-ELIM to replace TRS_Z4 by (CONS TRS_Z5 TRS_Z6), (CAR TRS_Z4)
by TRS_Z5 and (CDR TRS_Z4) by TRS_Z6. (4) Finally, use CAR-CDR-ELIM
to replace TRS_Z5 by (CONS TRS_Z7 TRS_Z8), (CAR TRS_Z5) by TRS_Z7 and
(CDR TRS_Z5) by TRS_Z8 and restrict the type of the new variable TRS_Z7
to be that of the term it replaces. These steps produce the following
goal.
Subgoal *1/1'4'
(IMPLIES (AND (SYMBOLP TRS_Z7)
(NOT (EQUAL TRS_Z7 T))
(NOT (EQUAL TRS_Z7 NIL))
(CONSP (CONS TRS_Z7 TRS_Z8))
(CONSP (CONS (CONS TRS_Z7 TRS_Z8) TRS_Z6))
(CONSP (LIST* TRS_Z3 (CONS TRS_Z7 TRS_Z8)
TRS_Z6))
(SYMBOLP TRS_Z1)
(NOT (EQUAL TRS_Z1 T))
(NOT (EQUAL TRS_Z1 NIL))
(CONSP (LIST* TRS_Z1 TRS_Z3 (CONS TRS_Z7 TRS_Z8)
TRS_Z6))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3)
(NOT TRS_Z8)
(NOT TRS_Z6)
(EQUAL TRS_Z1 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL TRS_Z7 'TRS_NIL)
(EQUAL 'TRS_FALSE
(CAR (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3))))
(CDR (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3))).
By case analysis we reduce the conjecture to
Subgoal *1/1'5'
(IMPLIES (AND (SYMBOLP TRS_Z7)
(NOT (EQUAL TRS_Z7 T))
TRS_Z7 (CONSP (CONS TRS_Z7 TRS_Z8))
(CONSP (CONS (CONS TRS_Z7 TRS_Z8) TRS_Z6))
(CONSP (LIST* TRS_Z3 (CONS TRS_Z7 TRS_Z8)
TRS_Z6))
(SYMBOLP TRS_Z1)
(NOT (EQUAL TRS_Z1 T))
TRS_Z1
(CONSP (LIST* TRS_Z1 TRS_Z3 (CONS TRS_Z7 TRS_Z8)
TRS_Z6))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3)
(NOT TRS_Z8)
(NOT TRS_Z6)
(EQUAL TRS_Z1 'TRS_CONS)
(EQUAL TRS_Z7 'TRS_NIL)
(EQUAL 'TRS_FALSE
(CAR (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3))))
(CDR (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3))).
This simplifies, using the :executable-counterparts of CONS, CONSP,
EQUAL, NOT and SYMBOLP and primitive type reasoning, to
Subgoal *1/1'6'
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3)
(EQUAL 'TRS_FALSE
(CAR (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3))))
(CDR (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3))).
Name the formula above *1.1.
Perhaps we can prove *1.1 by induction. Three induction schemes are
suggested by this conjecture. Subsumption reduces that number to two.
These merge into one derived induction scheme.
We will induct according to a scheme suggested by (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3).
This suggestion was produced using the :induction rules TRS_EQ and
TRS_ISSORT[A0]. If we let (:P TRS_Z3) denote *1.1 above then the induction
scheme we'll use is
(AND (IMPLIES (NOT (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3)))
(:P TRS_Z3))
(IMPLIES (AND (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)
(EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)
(EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_S)))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_S)
(EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)))
T (:P (CADR TRS_Z3)))
(:P TRS_Z3))
(IMPLIES (AND (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)
(EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)
(EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_S)))
(AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_S)
(EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)))
(:P TRS_Z3))
(IMPLIES (AND (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)
(EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)))
(AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)
(EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_S)))
(:P TRS_Z3))
(IMPLIES (AND (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3))
(AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)
(EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)))
(:P TRS_Z3))).
This induction is justified by the same argument used to admit TRS_EQ.
When applied to the goal at hand the above induction scheme produces
four nontautological subgoals.
Subgoal *1.1/4
(IMPLIES (AND (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)
(EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)
(EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_S)))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_S)
(EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)))
T
(CDR (TRS_EQ (CADR TRS_Z3) (CADR TRS_Z3)))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3)
(EQUAL 'TRS_FALSE
(CAR (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3))))
(CDR (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3))).
By the simple :definition EQ we reduce the conjecture to
Subgoal *1.1/4'
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3)
(NOT (AND (EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)
(EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)))
(NOT (AND (EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)
(EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_S)))
(NOT (AND (EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_S)
(EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)))
(CDR (TRS_EQ (CADR TRS_Z3) (CADR TRS_Z3)))
(EQUAL 'TRS_FALSE
(CAR (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3))))
(CDR (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3))).
But simplification reduces this to T, using the :definitions TRS_EQ
and TRS_ISSORT[A0], the :executable-counterpart of EQUAL, primitive
type reasoning and the :type-prescription rules TRS_EQ and TRS_ISSORT[A0].
Subgoal *1.1/3
(IMPLIES (AND (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)
(EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)
(EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_S)))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_S)
(EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)))
T
(NOT (EQUAL 'TRS_FALSE
(CAR (TRS_EQ (CADR TRS_Z3) (CADR TRS_Z3)))))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3)
(EQUAL 'TRS_FALSE
(CAR (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3))))
(CDR (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3))).
By the simple :definition EQ we reduce the conjecture to
Subgoal *1.1/3'
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3)
(NOT (AND (EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)
(EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)))
(NOT (AND (EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)
(EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_S)))
(NOT (AND (EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_S)
(EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)))
(NOT (EQUAL 'TRS_FALSE
(CAR (TRS_EQ (CADR TRS_Z3) (CADR TRS_Z3)))))
(EQUAL 'TRS_FALSE
(CAR (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3))))
(CDR (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3))).
But simplification reduces this to T, using the :definitions TRS_EQ
and TRS_ISSORT[A0], the :executable-counterpart of EQUAL, primitive
type reasoning and the :type-prescription rule TRS_ISSORT[A0].
Subgoal *1.1/2
(IMPLIES (AND (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)
(EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)
(EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_S)))
(NOT (AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_S)
(EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)))
T (NOT (TRS_ISSORT[A0] (CADR TRS_Z3)))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3)
(EQUAL 'TRS_FALSE
(CAR (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3))))
(CDR (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3))).
By the simple :definition EQ we reduce the conjecture to
Subgoal *1.1/2'
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3)
(NOT (AND (EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)
(EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)))
(NOT (AND (EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)
(EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_S)))
(NOT (AND (EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_S)
(EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)))
(NOT (TRS_ISSORT[A0] (CADR TRS_Z3)))
(EQUAL 'TRS_FALSE
(CAR (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3))))
(CDR (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3))).
But simplification reduces this to T, using the :definition TRS_ISSORT[A0]
and primitive type reasoning.
Subgoal *1.1/1
(IMPLIES (AND (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3)
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3))
(AND (EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)
(EQ (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0))
(TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3)
(EQUAL 'TRS_FALSE
(CAR (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3))))
(CDR (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3))).
By the simple :definition EQ we reduce the conjecture to
Subgoal *1.1/1'
(IMPLIES (AND (TRS_ISSORT[A0] TRS_Z3)
(EQUAL (CAR TRS_Z3) 'TRS_0)
(EQUAL 'TRS_FALSE
(CAR (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3))))
(CDR (TRS_EQ TRS_Z3 TRS_Z3))).
But simplification reduces this to T, using the :definitions TRS_EQ
and TRS_ISSORT[A0], the :executable-counterparts of CAR and EQUAL and
primitive type reasoning.
That completes the proofs of *1.1 and *1.
Q.E.D.
Summary
Form: ( DEFTHM TEST ...)
Rules: ((:DEFINITION EQ)
(:DEFINITION NOT)
(:DEFINITION TRS_DELPRIME)
(:DEFINITION TRS_EQ)
(:DEFINITION TRS_EQUAL_BOOL)
(:DEFINITION TRS_ISBOOL)
(:DEFINITION TRS_ISSORT[A0])
(:DEFINITION TRS_ISSORT[A24])
(:DEFINITION TRS_LAST)
(:ELIM CAR-CDR-ELIM)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART CAR)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART CDR)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART CONS)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART CONSP)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART EQUAL)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART NOT)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART SYMBOLP)
(:EXECUTABLE-COUNTERPART TRS_ISBOOL)
(:FAKE-RUNE-FOR-TYPE-SET NIL)
(:INDUCTION TRS_EQ)
(:INDUCTION TRS_ISSORT[A0])
(:INDUCTION TRS_LAST)
(:REWRITE CAR-CONS)
(:REWRITE CDR-CONS)
(:REWRITE CONS-EQUAL)
(:TYPE-PRESCRIPTION TRS_EQ)
(:TYPE-PRESCRIPTION TRS_ISSORT[A0])
(:TYPE-PRESCRIPTION TRS_ISSORT[A24]))
Warnings: None
Time: 0.15 seconds (prove: 0.14, print: 0.01, other: 0.00)
TEST
ACL2 !>Bye.