[Imprint][Data Privacy Statement][E-Mail]



View long theorem info. View the proof. Back to main index. View the specification. View theorem base summary, View theorem base listing, the used properties by spec, the dependency list, the symbol table,

Proof step 1 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (conclusion) (back to tree)

#c mx ≠ 0 ⊦ ¬ #r mx < #clean0rows(mx, i) + #clean1rows(mx, i)

System applied rule normalize

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

Additional information

Proof step 2 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#c mx ≠ 0, #r mx < #clean0rows(mx, i) + #clean1rows(mx, i) ⊦

User applied rule apply lemma

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

spec: <toplevel>, name:clean1rows-bounded, seq: ⊦ ¬ #r mx < #clean1rows(mx, i), subst:[mx, i] → [mx, i]

Additional information

Used terms: mx, i

Proof step 3 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

⊦ ¬ #r mx < #clean1rows(mx, i)

Lemma clean1rows-bounded

Proof step 4 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#c mx ≠ 0, #r mx < #clean0rows(mx, i) + #clean1rows(mx, i), ¬ #r mx < #clean1rows(mx, i) ⊦

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

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 < m + n ↔ n ≠ 0; (s) ⊦ m < n → n ≠ 0; (s) f: ⊦ m < n → n ≠ 0; (forward) from specification nat-basic fle-01: ⊦ m ≤ n ∧ n < n0 → m < n0; (forward) from specification nat ⊦ m < n ↔ ¬ n ≤ m; (ss)

Proof step 5 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#c mx ≠ 0, #clean0rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #r mx < #clean0rows(mx, i) + #clean1rows(mx, i), #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ #r mx ⊦

User applied rule apply lemma

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

spec: <toplevel>, name:clean0rows-bounded, seq: ⊦ ¬ #r mx < #clean0rows(mx, i), subst:[mx, i] → [mx, i]

Additional information

Used terms: mx, i

Proof step 6 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

⊦ ¬ #r mx < #clean0rows(mx, i)

Lemma clean0rows-bounded

Proof step 7 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#c mx ≠ 0, #clean0rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #r mx < #clean0rows(mx, i) + #clean1rows(mx, i), #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ #r mx, ¬ #r mx < #clean0rows(mx, i) ⊦

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

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 < m + n ↔ n ≠ 0; (s) fle-01: ⊦ m ≤ n ∧ n < n0 → m < n0; (forward) from specification nat ⊦ m < n ↔ ¬ n ≤ m; (ss)

Proof step 8 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#c mx ≠ 0, #clean0rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #r mx < #clean0rows(mx, i) + #clean1rows(mx, i), #clean0rows(mx, i) ≤ #r mx, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ #r mx ⊦

User applied rule cut formula

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

fma: #clean0rows(mx, i) < #r mx

Additional information

Used formulas: #clean0rows(mx, i) < #r mx

Proof step 9 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#c mx ≠ 0, #clean0rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #r mx < #clean0rows(mx, i) + #clean1rows(mx, i), #clean0rows(mx, i) < #r mx, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ #r mx, #clean0rows(mx, i) ≤ #r mx ⊦

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

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 ⊦ 1 < m ↔ ¬(m = 0 ∨ m = 1); (s) ⊦ m + n < m + n0 ↔ n < n0; (s) ⊦ m +1 = m + 1; (s) ⊦ m < n → n ≠ 0; (s) lf: ⊦ m < n ∧ n < n0 → m +1 < n0; (forward) from specification nat-basic f: ⊦ m < n → n ≠ 0; (forward) from specification nat-basic ⊦ m < n → m ≤ n; (s)

Proof step 10 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#c mx ≠ 0, #clean0rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 1, #r mx < #clean0rows(mx, i) + #clean1rows(mx, i), #clean0rows(mx, i) < #r mx, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ #r mx ⊦

User applied rule apply lemma

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

spec: <toplevel>, name:clean0rows-allls, seq: ⊦ r < #clean0rows(mx, i) → count(mx[r]r, λ j. ¬ j < i) = 0, subst:[mx, i, r] → [mx, i, #clean0rows(mx, i) - 1]

Additional information

Used terms: mx, i, #clean0rows(mx, i) - 1

Proof step 11 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

⊦ r < #clean0rows(mx, i) → count(mx[r]r, λ j. ¬ j < i) = 0

Lemma clean0rows-allls

Proof step 12 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#c mx ≠ 0, #clean0rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 1, #clean0rows(mx, i) < #r mx, #r mx < #clean0rows(mx, i) + #clean1rows(mx, i), #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ #r mx, #clean0rows(mx, i) - 1 < #clean0rows(mx, i) → count(mx[#clean0rows(mx, i) - 1]r, λ j. ¬ j < i) = 0 ⊦

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

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 < n; (s) ⊦ m < n + 1 ↔ ¬ n < m; (s) n0 ≤ n ⊦ n - n0 < m ↔ n < m + n0; (s) ⊦ m < 1 ↔ m = 0; (s) ⊦ m ≤ n ↔ ¬ n < m; (ss)

Proof step 13 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

count(mx[#clean0rows(mx, i) - 1]r, λ j. ¬ j < i) = 0, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean0rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 1, #r mx < #clean0rows(mx, i) + #clean1rows(mx, i), #clean0rows(mx, i) < #r mx, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ #r mx ⊦

Heuristic elimination applied rule apply elim lemma

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

spec: nat, name:elim-pred-c, seq:n ≠ 0 ⊦ m = n - 1 ↔ n = m + 1, subst:[n, m] → [#clean0rows(mx, i), m]

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: n ≠ 0 ⊦ m = n - 1 ↔ n = m + 1; (elim) Used terms: #clean0rows(mx, i), m

Proof step 14 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = m + 1, count(mx[m]r, λ j. ¬ j < i) = 0, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean0rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 1, #clean0rows(mx, i) < #r mx, #r mx < #clean0rows(mx, i) + #clean1rows(mx, i), #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ #r mx ⊦

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

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 ≤ m + n; (s) ⊦ 1 < m ↔ ¬(m = 0 ∨ m = 1); (s) ⊦ m + n < m + n0 ↔ n < n0; (s) let: ⊦ n ≤ n0 ∧ n0 ≤ n1 → n ≤ n1; (forward) from specification nat fle: ⊦ m < n ∧ n ≤ n0 → m < n0; (forward) from specification nat ⊦ m < n ↔ ¬ n ≤ m; (ss) ⊦ m < n + 1 ↔ ¬ n < m; (s) ⊦ ¬ m + n < m; (s) ⊦ m ≠ 1 → (m + n = 1 ↔ m = 0 ∧ n = 1); (ws) ⊦ m + 1 ≠ 0; (s) n0 < n ⊦ (* n) < m0 + (* n0) ↔ n - n0 < m0; (s) ⊦ m +1 = m + 1; (s) fle-01: ⊦ m ≤ n ∧ n < n0 → m < n0; (forward) from specification nat f: ⊦ m < n → n ≠ 0; (forward) from specification nat-basic trans-nat: ⊦ n < n0 ∧ n0 < n1 → n < n1; (forward) from specification nat-basic lf-02: ⊦ m < n ∧ m = n0 → n0 < n; (forward) from specification nat-basic lf: ⊦ m < n ∧ n < n0 → m +1 < n0; (forward) from specification nat-basic

Proof step 15 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = m + 1, count(mx[m]r, λ j. ¬ j < i) = 0, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 1, m + 1 < #r mx, #r mx ≤ m + #clean1rows(mx, i), #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ #r mx ⊦

User applied rule apply lemma

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

spec: <toplevel>, name:clean1rows-allge, seq:⊦ #r mx ≤ #clean1rows(mx, i) + r ∧ r < #r mx → count(mx[r]r, λ j. j < i) = 0, subst:[mx, i, r] → [mx, i, m]

Additional information

Used terms: mx, i, m

Proof step 16 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

⊦ #r mx ≤ #clean1rows(mx, i) + r ∧ r < #r mx → count(mx[r]r, λ j. j < i) = 0

Lemma clean1rows-allge

Proof step 17 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = m + 1, count(mx[m]r, λ j. ¬ j < i) = 0, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 1, m + 1 < #r mx, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ #r mx, #r mx ≤ m + #clean1rows(mx, i), #r mx ≤ #clean1rows(mx, i) + m ∧ m < #r mx → count(mx[m]r, λ j. j < i) = 0 ⊦

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

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 + 1 ≤ n ↔ m < n; (s) ⊦ 1 < m ↔ ¬(m = 0 ∨ m = 1); (s) ⊦ m ≠ n → (m ≤ n ↔ m < n); (s) ⊦ m + n ≤ m + n0 ↔ n ≤ n0; (s) let: ⊦ n ≤ n0 ∧ n0 ≤ n1 → n ≤ n1; (forward) from specification nat ⊦ m < m + n ↔ n ≠ 0; (s) fle: ⊦ m < n ∧ n ≤ n0 → m < n0; (forward) from specification nat eqle-one: ⊦ m = n + 1 ∧ n < n0 → m ≤ n0; (forward) from specification nat ⊦ ¬ m < n → ¬ m + m0 < n; (s)

Proof step 18 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = m + 1, count(mx[m]r, λ j. ¬ j < i) = 0, count(mx[m]r, λ j. j < i) = 0, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 1, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, m + 1 < #r mx, m < #r mx, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ #r mx, #r mx ≤ m + #clean1rows(mx, i) ⊦

User applied rule apply rewrite lemma

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

spec: filter-count[oarray-sort-new], name:count-zero, seq: ⊦ count(x, p) = 0 ↔ (∀ n. n < # x → ¬ p(x[n])), subst:[x, p] → [mx[m]r, λ j. j < i], <all paths>

Additional information

Used terms: mx[m]r, λ j. j < i

Proof step 19 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

⊦ count(x, p) = 0 ↔ (∀ n. n < # x → ¬ p(x[n]))

A spec-lemma

Proof step 20 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = m + 1, count(mx[m]r, λ j. ¬ j < i) = 0, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 1, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, m < #r mx, m + 1 < #r mx, #r mx ≤ m + #clean1rows(mx, i), #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ #r mx, ∀ n. n < # mx[m]r → ¬ mx[m]r[n] < i ⊦

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ mx[r]r[c] = mx[r, c]; (s) ⊦ # mx[r]r = #c mx; (s)

Proof step 21 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = m + 1, count(mx[m]r, λ j. ¬ j < i) = 0, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 1, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, m + 1 < #r mx, m < #r mx, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ #r mx, #r mx ≤ m + #clean1rows(mx, i), ∀ n. n < #c mx → ¬ mx[m, n] < i ⊦

User applied rule apply rewrite lemma

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

spec: filter-count[oarray-sort-new], name:count-zero, seq: ⊦ count(x, p) = 0 ↔ (∀ n. n < # x → ¬ p(x[n])), subst:[x, p] → [mx[m]r, λ j. ¬ j < i], <all paths>

Additional information

Used terms: mx[m]r, λ j. ¬ j < i

Proof step 22 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

⊦ count(x, p) = 0 ↔ (∀ n. n < # x → ¬ p(x[n]))

A spec-lemma

Proof step 23 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = m + 1, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 1, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, m < #r mx, m + 1 < #r mx, #r mx ≤ m + #clean1rows(mx, i), #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ #r mx, ∀ n. n < #c mx → ¬ mx[m, n] < i, ∀ n. n < # mx[m]r → ¬ ¬ mx[m]r[n] < i ⊦

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ mx[r]r[c] = mx[r, c]; (s) ⊦ # mx[r]r = #c mx; (s)

Proof step 24 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = m + 1, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 1, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, m + 1 < #r mx, m < #r mx, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ #r mx, #r mx ≤ m + #clean1rows(mx, i), ∀ n. n < #c mx → ¬ mx[m, n] < i, ∀ n. n < #c mx → mx[m, n] < i ⊦

User applied rule all left

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

pos: left 9 terms: 0 abort: F discard: T computed: F

Additional information

Used terms: 0

Proof step 25 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = m + 1, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 1, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, m < #r mx, m + 1 < #r mx, #r mx ≤ m + #clean1rows(mx, i), #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ #r mx, 0 < #c mx → ¬ mx[m, 0] < i, ∀ n. n < #c mx → mx[m, n] < i ⊦

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ 0 < m ↔ m ≠ 0; (s)

Proof step 26 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = m + 1, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 1, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, m + 1 < #r mx, m < #r mx, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ #r mx, #r mx ≤ m + #clean1rows(mx, i), ¬ mx[m, 0] < i, ∀ n. n < #c mx → mx[m, n] < i ⊦

Heuristic quantifier closing applied rule all left

And closed the goal!

Rule argument

pos: left 10 terms: 0

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ 0 < m ↔ m ≠ 0; (s) Used terms: 0

Proof step 27 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#c mx ≠ 0, #clean0rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #r mx < #clean0rows(mx, i) + #clean1rows(mx, i), #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ #r mx, #clean0rows(mx, i) ≤ #r mx, ¬ #clean0rows(mx, i) < #r mx ⊦

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

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 < m + n ↔ n ≠ 0; (s) ⊦ m ≤ m; (s) let: ⊦ n ≤ n0 ∧ n0 ≤ n1 → n ≤ n1; (forward) from specification nat lf-02: ⊦ m < n ∧ m = n0 → n0 < n; (forward) from specification nat-basic ⊦ m ≤ n → (n ≤ m ↔ m = n); (s) ⊦ m < n ↔ ¬ n ≤ m; (ss)

Proof step 28 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = #r mx, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean0rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ #clean0rows(mx, i) ⊦

User applied rule apply lemma

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

spec: <toplevel>, name:clean1rows-allge, seq:⊦ #r mx ≤ #clean1rows(mx, i) + r ∧ r < #r mx → count(mx[r]r, λ j. j < i) = 0, subst:[mx, i, r] → [mx, i, #r mx - 1]

Additional information

Used terms: mx, i, #r mx - 1

Proof step 29 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

⊦ #r mx ≤ #clean1rows(mx, i) + r ∧ r < #r mx → count(mx[r]r, λ j. j < i) = 0

Lemma clean1rows-allge

Proof step 30 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = #r mx, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean0rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ #clean0rows(mx, i), #r mx ≤ #clean1rows(mx, i) + (#r mx - 1) ∧ #r mx - 1 < #r mx → count(mx[#r mx - 1]r, λ j. j < i) = 0 ⊦

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

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 < n; (s) ⊦ m < n + 1 ↔ ¬ n < m; (s) n0 ≤ n ⊦ n - n0 < m ↔ n < m + n0; (s) ⊦ m < 1 ↔ m = 0; (s) ⊦ m ≤ n ↔ ¬ n < m; (ss)

Proof step 31 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = #r mx, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean0rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ #clean0rows(mx, i), #clean0rows(mx, i) ≤ #clean1rows(mx, i) + (#clean0rows(mx, i) - 1) → count(mx[#clean0rows(mx, i) - 1]r, λ j. j < i) = 0 ⊦

Heuristic elimination applied rule apply elim lemma

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

spec: nat, name:elim-pred-c, seq:n ≠ 0 ⊦ m = n - 1 ↔ n = m + 1, subst:[n, m] → [#clean0rows(mx, i), m]

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: n ≠ 0 ⊦ m = n - 1 ↔ n = m + 1; (elim) Used terms: #clean0rows(mx, i), m

Proof step 32 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = #r mx, #clean0rows(mx, i) = m + 1, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean0rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ #clean0rows(mx, i), #clean0rows(mx, i) ≤ #clean1rows(mx, i) + m → count(mx[m]r, λ j. j < i) = 0 ⊦

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

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 ≤ m + n; (s) let: ⊦ n ≤ n0 ∧ n0 ≤ n1 → n ≤ n1; (forward) from specification nat not-zero: 0 < n ⊦ (* n) ≤ m → m ≠ 0; (forward) from specification nat ⊦ m < 1 ↔ m = 0; (s) ⊦ m ≤ n ↔ ¬ n < m; (ss) ⊦ m + n ≤ m + n0 ↔ n ≤ n0; (s) ⊦ m + 1 ≠ 0; (s)

Proof step 33 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = m + 1, m + 1 = #r mx, count(mx[m]r, λ j. j < i) = 0, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, 1 ≤ #clean1rows(mx, i), #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ m + 1 ⊦

User applied rule apply lemma

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

spec: <toplevel>, name:clean0rows-allls, seq: ⊦ r < #clean0rows(mx, i) → count(mx[r]r, λ j. ¬ j < i) = 0, subst:[mx, i, r] → [mx, i, m]

Additional information

Used terms: mx, i, m

Proof step 34 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

⊦ r < #clean0rows(mx, i) → count(mx[r]r, λ j. ¬ j < i) = 0

Lemma clean0rows-allls

Proof step 35 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = m + 1, m + 1 = #r mx, count(mx[m]r, λ j. j < i) = 0, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ m + 1, 1 ≤ #clean1rows(mx, i), m < #clean0rows(mx, i) → count(mx[m]r, λ j. ¬ j < i) = 0 ⊦

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

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 < n; (s) ⊦ m < n + 1 ↔ ¬ n < m; (s)

Proof step 36 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = m + 1, m + 1 = #r mx, count(mx[m]r, λ j. j < i) = 0, count(mx[m]r, λ j. ¬ j < i) = 0, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ m + 1, 1 ≤ #clean1rows(mx, i) ⊦

User applied rule apply rewrite lemma

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

spec: filter-count[oarray-sort-new], name:count-zero, seq: ⊦ count(x, p) = 0 ↔ (∀ n. n < # x → ¬ p(x[n])), subst:[x, p] → [mx[m]r, λ j. ¬ j < i], <all paths>

Additional information

Used terms: mx[m]r, λ j. ¬ j < i

Proof step 37 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

⊦ count(x, p) = 0 ↔ (∀ n. n < # x → ¬ p(x[n]))

A spec-lemma

Proof step 38 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = m + 1, m + 1 = #r mx, count(mx[m]r, λ j. j < i) = 0, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, 1 ≤ #clean1rows(mx, i), #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ m + 1, ∀ n. n < # mx[m]r → ¬ ¬ mx[m]r[n] < i ⊦

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ mx[r]r[c] = mx[r, c]; (s) ⊦ # mx[r]r = #c mx; (s)

Proof step 39 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = m + 1, m + 1 = #r mx, count(mx[m]r, λ j. j < i) = 0, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ m + 1, 1 ≤ #clean1rows(mx, i), ∀ n. n < #c mx → mx[m, n] < i ⊦

User applied rule apply rewrite lemma

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

spec: filter-count[oarray-sort-new], name:count-zero, seq: ⊦ count(x, p) = 0 ↔ (∀ n. n < # x → ¬ p(x[n])), subst:[x, p] → [mx[m]r, λ j. j < i], <all paths>

Additional information

Used terms: mx[m]r, λ j. j < i

Proof step 40 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

⊦ count(x, p) = 0 ↔ (∀ n. n < # x → ¬ p(x[n]))

A spec-lemma

Proof step 41 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = m + 1, m + 1 = #r mx, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, 1 ≤ #clean1rows(mx, i), #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ m + 1, ∀ n. n < #c mx → mx[m, n] < i, ∀ n. n < # mx[m]r → ¬ mx[m]r[n] < i ⊦

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ mx[r]r[c] = mx[r, c]; (s) ⊦ # mx[r]r = #c mx; (s)

Proof step 42 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = m + 1, m + 1 = #r mx, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ m + 1, 1 ≤ #clean1rows(mx, i), ∀ n. n < #c mx → mx[m, n] < i, ∀ n. n < #c mx → ¬ mx[m, n] < i ⊦

User applied rule all left

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

pos: left 8 terms: 0 abort: F discard: T computed: F

Additional information

Used terms: 0

Proof step 43 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = m + 1, m + 1 = #r mx, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, 1 ≤ #clean1rows(mx, i), #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ m + 1, 0 < #c mx → ¬ mx[m, 0] < i, ∀ n. n < #c mx → mx[m, n] < i ⊦

Heuristic simplifier applied rule simplifier

And obtained the following new goals

Rule argument

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ 0 < m ↔ m ≠ 0; (s)

Proof step 44 from proof clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (previous step) (back to tree)

#clean0rows(mx, i) = m + 1, m + 1 = #r mx, #c mx ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≠ 0, #clean1rows(mx, i) ≤ m + 1, 1 ≤ #clean1rows(mx, i), ¬ mx[m, 0] < i, ∀ n. n < #c mx → mx[m, n] < i ⊦

Heuristic quantifier closing applied rule all left

And closed the goal!

Rule argument

pos: left 8 terms: 0

Additional information

Used simplifier rules: ⊦ 0 < m ↔ m ≠ 0; (s) Used terms: 0

Proof Tree for clean0-plus-clean1-bounded (View conclusion)

The following image shows the proof tree of sequent calculus. The proved goal is at the bottom. You can click on the nodes to view additional rules. See here for details on colors in a proof tree.

the proof tree