Proof step 1 from proof Uniform-array (conclusion) (back to tree)

System applied rule normalize

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 2:

  ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Proof step 2 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 3:

  ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)), ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Proof step 3 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

User applied rule cut formula

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 4:

  ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)), ∃ n. n ≤ # ar ∧ (∀ m. m < # ar - n → ar(m) = const) ⊦

• Proof step 48:

  ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)) ⊦ ∃ n. n ≤ # ar ∧ (∀ m. m < # ar - n → ar(m) = const)

Rule argument

Additional information

Used formulas: ∃ n. n ≤ # ar ∧ (∀ m. m < # ar - n → ar(m) = const)

Proof step 4 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 5:

  n ≤ # ar, ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)), ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)), ∀ m. m + n < # ar → ar(m) = const ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: n0 ≤ n ⊦ m < n - n0 ↔ m + n0 < n; (s) ⊦ m ≤ n → (n < m ↔ false); (s) ⊦ m ≤ n ↔ ¬ n < m; (ss)

Proof step 5 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

User applied rule structural induction

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 6:

  0 ≤ # ar, ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. m + 0 < # ar → ar(m) = const, ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)) ⊦

• Proof step 13:

  n0.+1 ≤ # ar, ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. m + n0.+1 < # ar → ar(m) = const, ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)), ∀ ar, indhyp-array. ¬ ( n0 ≤ # ar ∧ ¬ indhyp-array(ar) ∧ (∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m))) ∧ (∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a))) ∧ (∀ m. m + n0 < # ar → ar(m) = const)) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: Nat freely generated by 0, +1;

Proof step 6 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 7:

  ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)), ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)), ∀ m. m < # ar → ar(m) = const ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: c: ⊦ m + n = n + m; from specification nat-basic a: ⊦ (m + n0) + n1 = m + n0 + n1; from specification nat-basic ⊦ n + 0 = n; (s) ⊦ 0 ≤ m; (s)

Proof step 7 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

User applied rule all left

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 8:

  indhyp-array(mklist(const, # ar)), ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. m < # ar → ar(m) = const, ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used terms: # ar

Proof step 8 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

User applied rule cut formula

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 9:

  ar ≠ mklist(const, # ar), indhyp-array(mklist(const, # ar)), ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)), ∀ m. m < # ar → ar(m) = const ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used formulas: ar = mklist(const, # ar)

Proof step 9 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

User applied rule apply rewrite lemma

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 10:

  ⊦ x = y ↔ # x = # y ∧ (∀ n. n < # x → x(n) = y(n))

• Proof step 11:

  indhyp-array(mklist(const, # ar)), ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. m < # ar → ar(m) = const, ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)), # ar ≠ # mklist(const, # ar) ∨ (∃ n. ¬(n < # ar → ar(n) = mklist(const, # ar)(n))) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used terms: ar, mklist(const, # ar)

Proof step 10 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

A spec-lemma

Proof step 11 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 12:

  ar(n) ≠ const, ar ≠ [], n < # ar, indhyp-array(mklist(const, # ar)), ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. m < # ar → ar(m) = const, ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ # x = 0 ↔ x = []; (s) f: ⊦ m < n → n ≠ 0; (forward) from specification nat-basic ⊦ m < n → mklist(a, n)(m) = a; (s) ⊦ # mklist(a, n) = n; (s)

Proof step 12 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

Heuristic quantifier closing applied rule all left

And closed the goal!

Rule argument

Additional information

Used terms: n

Proof step 13 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 14:

  ar ≠ [], n0 < # ar, ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const, ∀ ar0, indhyp-array0. ¬ n0 ≤ # ar0 ∨ indhyp-array0(ar0) ∨ ¬(∀ m. indhyp-array0(mklist(const, m))) ∨ ¬(∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array0(ar) → indhyp-array0(ar(m := a))) ∨ ¬(∀ m. m + n0 < # ar0 → ar0(m) = const), ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ # x = 0 ↔ x = []; (s) f: ⊦ m < n → n ≠ 0; (forward) from specification nat-basic a: ⊦ (m + n0) + n1 = m + n0 + n1; from specification nat-basic ⊦ m.+1 = m + 1; (s) c: ⊦ m + n = n + m; from specification nat-basic ⊦ m + 1 ≤ n ↔ m < n; (s)

Proof step 14 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

User applied rule all left

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 15:

  ar ≠ [], n0 < # ar, ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)), ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)), ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const, ¬ n0 ≤ # ar(# ar - n0.+1 := const) ∨ indhyp-array(ar(# ar - n0.+1 := const)) ∨ ¬(∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m))) ∨ ¬(∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a))) ∨ ¬(∀ m. m + n0 < # ar(# ar - n0.+1 := const) → ar(# ar - n0.+1 := const)(m) = const) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used terms: ar(# ar - n0.+1 := const), indhyp-array

Proof step 15 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 16:

  ar ≠ [], n0 < # ar, ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const, ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)), ¬ n0 ≤ # ar(# ar - n0 + 1 := const) ∨ indhyp-array(ar(# ar - n0 + 1 := const)) ∨ ¬(m + n0 < # ar(# ar - n0 + 1 := const) → ar(# ar - n0 + 1 := const)(m) = const) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ m.+1 = m + 1; (s)

Proof step 16 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

Heuristic elimination applied rule apply elim lemma

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 17:

  # ar = n1 + n0 + 1, ar ≠ [], n0 < # ar, n0 + 1 ≤ # ar, ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)), ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)), ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const, ¬ n0 ≤ # ar(n1 := const) ∨ indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)) ∨ ¬(m + n0 < # ar(n1 := const) → ar(n1 := const)(m) = const) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ m + 1 ≤ n ↔ m < n; (s) ⊦ m < n ↔ ¬ n ≤ m; (ss) ⊦ m < n → (n ≤ m ↔ false); (s) a: ⊦ (m + n0) + n1 = m + n0 + n1; from specification nat-basic c: ⊦ m + n = n + m; from specification nat-basic n ≤ m ⊦ n0 = m - n ↔ m = n0 + n; (elim) Used terms: # ar, n0 + 1, n1

Proof step 17 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 18:

  # ar = n1 + n0 + 1, ar ≠ [], n0 < # ar, ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)), ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)), ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const, ¬ n0 ≤ # ar(n1 := const) ∨ indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)) ∨ ¬(m + n0 < # ar(n1 := const) → ar(n1 := const)(m) = const) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: c: ⊦ m + n = n + m; from specification nat-basic a: ⊦ (m + n0) + n1 = m + n0 + n1; from specification nat-basic ⊦ ¬ m + n < m; (s) ⊦ m < n + 1 ↔ ¬ n < m; (s) lf-01: ⊦ m < n ∧ n = n0 → m < n0; (forward) from specification nat-basic ⊦ m + 1 ≤ n ↔ m < n; (s)

Proof step 18 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

User applied rule case distinction

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 19:

  # ar = n1 + n0 + 1, ar ≠ [], n0 < # ar, ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ¬ n0 ≤ # ar(n1 := const), ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const, ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)) ⊦

• Proof step 22:

  # ar = n1 + n0 + 1, ar ≠ [], n0 < # ar, indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)), ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const, ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)) ⊦

• Proof step 41:

  # ar = n1 + n0 + 1, ar(n1 := const)(m) ≠ const, ar ≠ [], m + n0 < # ar(n1 := const), n0 < # ar, ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const, ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Proof step 19 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 20:

  # ar = n1 + n0 + 1, ar ≠ [], # ar(n1 := const) < n1 + n0, # ar(n1 := const) < # ar, # ar(n1 := const) < n0, n0 < # ar, ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const, ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ m < n → n ≠ 0; (s) f: ⊦ m < n → n ≠ 0; (forward) from specification nat-basic c: ⊦ m + n = n + m; from specification nat-basic a: ⊦ (m + n0) + n1 = m + n0 + n1; from specification nat-basic ⊦ m = m0 + n0 ∧ n < n0 → m0 + n < m; (s) ⊦ m < n → ¬ n < m; (s) ⊦ m < n + 1 ↔ ¬ n < m; (s) ⊦ m + n < m + n0 ↔ n < n0; (s) lf-01: ⊦ m < n ∧ n = n0 → m < n0; (forward) from specification nat-basic ⊦ m.+1 = m + 1; (s) trans-Nat: ⊦ n < n0 ∧ n0 < n1 → n < n1; (forward) from specification nat-basic lf: ⊦ m < n ∧ n < n0 → m.+1 < n0; (forward) from specification nat-basic ⊦ m ≤ n ↔ ¬ n < m; (ss)

Proof step 20 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

User applied rule apply rewrite lemma

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 21:

  ⊦ # x ≤ n → # x(n := a) = # x

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ ¬ n < n; (s) ⊦ m ≤ n ↔ ¬ n < m; (ss) ⊦ n < # x → # x(n := a) = # x; (s) Used terms: ar, n1, const

Proof step 21 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

A spec-lemma

Proof step 22 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

User applied rule all left

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 23:

  # ar = n1 + n0 + 1, ar ≠ [], n0 < # ar, indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)), ¬ indhyp-array(ar), indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)) → indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1))), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)), ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used terms: ar(n1 := const), n1, ar(n1)

Proof step 23 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 24:

  # ar = n1 + n0 + 1, ar ≠ [], n0 < # ar, indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)), indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1))), ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const, ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Proof step 24 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

User applied rule cut formula

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 25:

  # ar = n1 + n0 + 1, ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1)) ≠ ar, ar ≠ [], n0 < # ar, indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1))), indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)), ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)), ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used formulas: ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1)) = ar

Proof step 25 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

User applied rule apply rewrite lemma

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 26:

  ⊦ x = y ↔ # x = # y ∧ (∀ n. n < # x → x(n) = y(n))

• Proof step 27:

  # ar = n1 + n0 + 1, ar ≠ [], n0 < # ar, indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)), indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1))), ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const, ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)), # ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1)) ≠ # ar ∨ (∃ n. ¬(n < # ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1)) → ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1))(n) = ar(n))) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used terms: ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1)), ar

Proof step 26 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

A spec-lemma

Proof step 27 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 28:

  # ar = n1 + n0 + 1, ar ≠ [], n0 < # ar, indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1))), indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)), ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)), ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const, # ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1)) ≠ # ar ∨ ¬(n < # ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1)) → ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1))(n) = ar(n)) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Proof step 28 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

User applied rule apply rewrite lemma

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 29:

  ⊦ # x ≤ n → # x(n := a) = # x

• Proof step 30:

  # ar = n1 + n0 + 1, ar ≠ [], n0 < # ar, indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)), indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1))), ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ¬ # ar(n1 := const) ≤ n1, ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const, ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)), # ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1)) ≠ # ar ∨ ¬(n < # ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1)) → ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1))(n) = ar(n)) ⊦

• Proof step 36:

  # ar = n1 + n0 + 1, ar ≠ [], n0 < # ar, indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)), indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1))), # ar(n1 := const) ≤ n1, ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const, ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)), # ar(n1 := const) ≠ # ar ∨ ¬(n < # ar(n1 := const) → ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1))(n) = ar(n)) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used terms: ar(n1 := const), n1, ar(n1)

Proof step 29 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

A spec-lemma

Proof step 30 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 31:

  # ar = n1 + n0 + 1, ar(n1 := const) ≠ [], ar ≠ [], n1 < # ar(n1 := const), n0 < # ar, indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)), indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1))), ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const, ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)), # ar(n1 := const) ≠ # ar ∨ ¬(n < # ar(n1 := const) → ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1))(n) = ar(n)) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ # x = 0 ↔ x = []; (s) f: ⊦ m < n → n ≠ 0; (forward) from specification nat-basic ⊦ n < # x → # x(n := a) = # x; (s) ⊦ m ≤ n ↔ ¬ n < m; (ss)

Proof step 31 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

User applied rule apply rewrite lemma

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 32:

  ⊦ n < # x → # x(n := a) = # x

• Proof step 33:

  # ar = n1 + n0 + 1, ar(n1 := const) ≠ [], ar ≠ [], n0 < # ar, n1 < # ar, indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1))), indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)), ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)), ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const, # ar ≠ # ar ∨ ¬(n < # ar → ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1))(n) = ar(n)) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ m < n ↔ ¬ n ≤ m; (ss) ⊦ # x ≤ n → # x(n := a) = # x; (s) ⊦ m ≤ n → (n < m ↔ false); (s) Used terms: ar, n1, const

Proof step 32 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

A spec-lemma

Proof step 33 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 34:

  # ar = n1 + n0 + 1, ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1))(n) ≠ ar(n), ar(n1 := const) ≠ [], ar ≠ [], n < # ar, n0 < # ar, n1 < # ar, indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1))), indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)), n ≤ n1 + n0, ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)), ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ m < n ↔ ¬ n ≤ m; (ss) c: ⊦ m + n = n + m; from specification nat-basic a: ⊦ (m + n0) + n1 = m + n0 + n1; from specification nat-basic ⊦ ¬ m + n < m; (s) ⊦ m < n + 1 ↔ ¬ n < m; (s) lf-01: ⊦ m < n ∧ n = n0 → m < n0; (forward) from specification nat-basic

Proof step 34 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

User applied rule apply rewrite lemma

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 35:

  ⊦ m ≠ n → ar(n := a)(m) = ar(m)

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ m < n ↔ ¬ n ≤ m; (ss) ⊦ m < n → (n ≤ m ↔ false); (s) m < # x ⊦ m ≠ n → x(m := a)(n) = x(n); (s) ⊦ n < # x → # x(n := a) = # x; (s) m < # x ⊦ x(m := a)(m) = a; (s) Used terms: ar(n1 := const), n1, ar(n1), n

Proof step 35 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

Lemma Put-other

Proof step 36 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

User applied rule apply rewrite lemma

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 37:

  ⊦ n < # x → # x(n := a) = # x

• Proof step 38:

  # ar = n1 + n0 + 1, ar ≠ [], n0 < # ar, indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1))), indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)), # ar(n1 := const) ≤ n1, ¬ n1 < # ar, ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)), ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const, # ar(n1 := const) ≠ # ar ∨ ¬(n < # ar(n1 := const) → ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1))(n) = ar(n)) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ m < n → (n ≤ m ↔ false); (s) Used terms: ar, n1, const

Proof step 37 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

A spec-lemma

Proof step 38 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 39:

  # ar = n1 + n0 + 1, ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1))(n) ≠ ar(n), ar ≠ [], n0 < # ar, n < # ar, n0 < n1, n < n1, indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)), indhyp-array(ar(n1 := const)(n1 := ar(n1))), n ≤ n1 + n0, # ar ≤ n1, ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const, ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ m < n → n ≠ 0; (s) f: ⊦ m < n → n ≠ 0; (forward) from specification nat-basic ⊦ m < n ↔ ¬ n ≤ m; (ss) c: ⊦ m + n = n + m; from specification nat-basic a: ⊦ (m + n0) + n1 = m + n0 + n1; from specification nat-basic ⊦ m < n + 1 ↔ ¬ n < m; (s) fle: ⊦ m < n ∧ n ≤ n0 → m < n0; (forward) from specification nat lf-01: ⊦ m < n ∧ n = n0 → m < n0; (forward) from specification nat-basic ⊦ # x ≤ n → # x(n := a) = # x; (s)

Proof step 39 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

User applied rule apply rewrite lemma

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 40:

  ⊦ m ≠ n → ar(n := a)(m) = ar(m)

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ # x ≤ n ∧ m ≠ n → x(n := a)(m) = x(m); (s) ⊦ m ≤ m + n; (s) a: ⊦ (m + n0) + n1 = m + n0 + n1; from specification nat-basic c: ⊦ m + n = n + m; from specification nat-basic ⊦ m < n → (n ≤ m ↔ false); (s) Used terms: ar(n1 := const), n1, ar(n1), n

Proof step 40 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

Lemma Put-other

Proof step 41 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 42:

  # ar = n1 + n0 + 1, ar(n1 := const)(m) ≠ const, ar(n1 := const) ≠ [], ar ≠ [], m + n0 < # ar(n1 := const), n0 < # ar, ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const, ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ # x = 0 ↔ x = []; (s) f: ⊦ m < n → n ≠ 0; (forward) from specification nat-basic

Proof step 42 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

User applied rule apply rewrite lemma

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 43:

  ⊦ m ≠ n → ar(n := a)(m) = ar(m)

• Proof step 44:

  # ar = n1 + n0 + 1, ar(m) ≠ const, ar(n1 := const) ≠ [], ar ≠ [], m ≠ n1, n0 < # ar, m + n0 < # ar(n1 := const), ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)), ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)), ∀ m. m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ m < n ↔ ¬ n ≤ m; (ss) ⊦ # x ≤ n → # x(n := a) = # x; (s) eqle-one: ⊦ m = n + 1 ∧ n < n0 → m ≤ n0; (forward) from specification nat lf-01: ⊦ m < n ∧ n = n0 → m < n0; (forward) from specification nat-basic fle: ⊦ m < n ∧ n ≤ n0 → m < n0; (forward) from specification nat ⊦ m ≤ m; (s) ⊦ m + n < m0 → m + n < m0 + n0; (s) ⊦ ¬ m + n < m; (s) a: ⊦ (m + n0) + n1 = m + n0 + n1; from specification nat-basic c: ⊦ m + n = n + m; from specification nat-basic m < # x ⊦ x(m := a)(m) = a; (s) Used terms: ar, n1, const, m

Proof step 43 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

Lemma Put-other

Proof step 44 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

User applied rule all left

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 45:

  # ar = n1 + n0 + 1, ar(m) ≠ const, ar(n1 := const) ≠ [], ar ≠ [], m ≠ n1, m + n0 < # ar(n1 := const), n0 < # ar, ¬ indhyp-array(ar), m + n0 + 1 < # ar → ar(m) = const, ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used terms: m

Proof step 45 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 46:

  # ar = n1 + n0 + 1, ar(n1 := const) ≠ [], ar(m) ≠ const, ar ≠ [], m ≠ n1, m + n0 < # ar(n1 := const), n0 < # ar, n0 < # ar(n1 := const), # ar ≤ # ar(n1 := const), # ar ≤ m + n0 + 1, ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)) ⊦

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: fle: ⊦ m < n ∧ n ≤ n0 → m < n0; (forward) from specification nat c: ⊦ m + n = n + m; from specification nat-basic a: ⊦ (m + n0) + n1 = m + n0 + n1; from specification nat-basic ⊦ ¬ m + n < m; (s) ⊦ m < n + 1 ↔ ¬ n < m; (s) le-one: ⊦ m ≤ n + 1 ∧ n < n0 → m ≤ n0; (forward) from specification nat ⊦ m < n ↔ ¬ n ≤ m; (ss)

Proof step 46 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

User applied rule apply rewrite lemma

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 47:

  ⊦ # x ≤ n → # x(n := a) = # x

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ m ≤ m; (s) ⊦ m < n → (n ≤ m + 1 ↔ n = m + 1); (s) eqle-one: ⊦ m = n + 1 ∧ n < n0 → m ≤ n0; (forward) from specification nat eqs: ⊦ m = n + n0 ∧ m = n + n1 → n0 = n1; (forward) from specification nat-basic a: ⊦ (m + n0) + n1 = m + n0 + n1; from specification nat-basic c: ⊦ m + n = n + m; from specification nat-basic lf-01: ⊦ m < n ∧ n = n0 → m < n0; (forward) from specification nat-basic fle: ⊦ m < n ∧ n ≤ n0 → m < n0; (forward) from specification nat ⊦ m ≤ n ↔ ¬ n < m; (ss) ⊦ n < # x → # x(n := a) = # x; (s) Used terms: ar, n1, const

Proof step 47 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

A spec-lemma

Proof step 48 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

• Proof step 49:

  ¬ indhyp-array(ar), ∀ m. indhyp-array(mklist(const, m)), ∀ ar, m, a. indhyp-array(ar) → indhyp-array(ar(m := a)) ⊦ ∃ n. n ≤ # ar ∧ (∀ m. m + n < # ar → ar(m) = const)

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: n0 ≤ n ⊦ m < n - n0 ↔ m + n0 < n; (s) ⊦ m ≤ n → (n < m ↔ false); (s) ⊦ m ≤ n ↔ ¬ n < m; (ss)

Proof step 49 from proof Uniform-array (previous step) (back to tree)

User applied rule exists right

And closed the goal!

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ m ≤ m; (s) ⊦ ¬ m + n < m; (s) a: ⊦ (m + n0) + n1 = m + n0 + n1; from specification nat-basic c: ⊦ m + n = n + m; from specification nat-basic Used terms: # ar