Difference between pages "Rodin Platform 3.4 Release Notes" and "Rodin Proof Tactics"

From Event-B
(Difference between pages)
Jump to navigationJump to search
imported>Nicolas
 
imported>Son
 
Line 1: Line 1:
{{TOCright}}
+
This page contains descriptions of the available proof tactics within the RODIN Platform.
  
== What's New in Rodin 3.4? ==
+
For each tactic, the descriptions is as follows:
  
Rodin 3.4 is mostly contains bug fixes, and upgrades the underlying Eclipse to Oxygen 4.7.2.
+
* '''Description''': A high-level description of the tactic. This will be the description appeared in the RODIN Platform preferences.
  
Eclipse 4.7.2 fixes a bug that affected the proving interface for MacOS users ([https://sourceforge.net/p/rodin-b-sharp/bugs/771/ bug #771]) and was requiring a feature patch.
+
* '''Additional details''': (Optional) Details explanation of the tactic.
  
Please note that we no longer provide 32-bit binary versions of the Rodin platform, since they are almost not downloaded anymore (as per the statistics on SourceForge), everyone is now running a 64-bit OS. Nonetheless, if needed, it is still possible for you to build 32-bit binaries from the source (see [[Building Rodin Headless]], you may also ask for [https://sourceforge.net/projects/rodin-b-sharp/support support]).
+
* '''ID''': An unique ID associated with the tactic.
  
=== Changes for plug-in developers ===
+
* '''Auto-tactic''': ''No'': the tactic cannot be added as an auto-tactic. ''Yes'': the tactic can be added as an auto-tactic. ''Default'': the tactic is a default auto-tactic.
  
Rodin 3.4 is built on top of Eclipse 4.7.2 (Oxygen), which requires Java 8, just as the previous version (Rodin 3.3 with Eclipse Neon).
+
* '''Post-tactic''': ''No'': the tactic cannot be added as a post-tactic. ''Yes'': the tactic can be added as a post-tactic. ''Default'': the tactic is a default post-tactic.
  
There are no API changes within Rodin Core.
+
* '''Preference display''': Information on how an application of the tactic is displayed in the auto-tactic preference or the post-tactic preference.
  
== Installing ==
+
* '''Interactive''': ''No'': the tactic cannot be invoked interactively. ''Global'': The tactic can be invoked from the Proof Control. ''Goal'': The tactic can be invoked from the goal view. ''Hypothesis'': The tactic can be invoked from the hypothesis view.  If the tactic can be invoked interactively (i.e. either ''Global'', ''Goal'' or ''Hypothesis''), more information about how this could be done will be given. Note that since the '''Post-tactics''' can be launched manually, any tactics that can be included in the post-tactic in principle can be invoked interactively via the post-tactic. Here ''No'' only means that there is no separate invocation for this specific tactic.
  
=== Downloading ===
+
* '''Proving interface display''': Example(s) on how an application of this tactic can be seen from the proving interface of the RODIN Platform.
  
[http://sourceforge.net/projects/rodin-b-sharp/files/Core_Rodin_Platform/3.4/ Download Rodin 3.4 now !]
+
== True Goal ==
 +
* '''Description''': Discharges any sequent whose goal is '⊤' (logical true).
  
=== Upgrading from a previous version of Rodin 3.x ===
+
* '''ID''': org.eventb.core.seqprover.trueGoalTac
  
The recommended way to upgrade is to download the platform afresh. It might be possible to upgrade using the Eclipse mechanism, but we did not test it.
+
* '''Auto-tactic''': ''Default''
  
== Requirements - Compatibility ==
+
* '''Post-tactic''': ''Default''
  
* Configurations supported (and for which binaries are provided)
+
* '''Preference display''': True Goal (Discharge)
** Linux 64-bit
 
** Windows 64-bit
 
** Mac OS X 64-bit
 
  
* You need to have a 64-bit Java JRE (8 or later) installed on your computer. The Rodin application will not work with a previous version or with a 32-bit JRE.
+
* '''Interactive''': ''No''
  
* To enhance your proving experience, the eclipse font settings (size, aspect...) are available from the preferences (General > Appearance > Colors and Fonts > Rodin). These settings allow you to modify the properties set on the Event-B Keyboard Text Font which is used in many views of the Proving UI. However, to enjoy these functionalities, you need to install the Brave Sans Mono font on your system. You can download this font from the link [http://sourceforge.net/projects/rodin-b-sharp/files/Font_%20Brave%20Sans%20Mono/0.12/ here].
+
* '''Proving interface display''': ⊤ goal
  
* Linux 64-bit:
+
[[Image:TrueGoalExp1.png]]
: package 'libc6-amd64:i386' must be installed, in particular in order to run external prover binaries
 
: depending on the distribution, you could instead need these packages: lib32z1 lib32ncurses5 lib32bz2-1.0
 
  
* Windows 64-bit:
+
== False Hypothesis ==
: Atelier B provers work more slowly; it can cause ML to not automatically discharge some sequents that it discharges on windows 32-bit, due to its timeout. A workaround is to download a custom profile: [http://sourceforge.net/projects/rodin-b-sharp/files/DefaultAuto_ML800 DefaultAuto_ML800], then Window > Preferences > Event-B > Sequent Prover > Auto/Post Tactic > Profiles (tab) > Import..., point to the downloaded file, 'Select All' profiles (there are 2), OK. Then in 'Auto/Post Tactic' tab, select 'Default Auto Tactic Profile (ML 800)' profile for auto-tactics. It is the same as the 'Default Auto Tactic Profile', except ML has a longer timeout (800 ms). You can of course change this timeout by editing the 'ML (800)' profile.
+
* '''Description''': Discharges any sequent containing a '' hypothesis
: We have not noticed this problem for Linux 64-bit, nor for other platforms; however if you do, the same workaround applies.
 
  
== External plug-ins ==
+
* '''ID''': org.eventb.core.seqprover.falseHypTac
{{:Rodin_Platform_3.4.0_External_Plug-ins}}
 
  
== Fixed Bugs and Implemented Features ==
+
* '''Auto-tactic''': ''Default''
  
Bugs
+
* '''Post-tactic''': ''Default''
767 Tactic profile editor has a tiny size under Linux
 
768 tiny type environment column
 
769 statistics column width
 
771 Proof view: unreadable formulas (white on white)
 
  
Feature Requests
+
* '''Preference display''': False Hypothesis (Discharge)
None
 
  
== Known Issues ==
+
* '''Interactive''': ''No''
See [http://sourceforge.net/p/rodin-b-sharp/bugs known bugs on SourceForge].
 
  
=== Linux GTK 3.10 ===
+
* '''Proving interface display''': ⊥ hyp
Under Linux with GTK+ 3.10.x, which is the currently distributed version for Ubuntu 14.04, the check boxes are not visible in the hypothesis rows, because they are white with no border.
 
Nonetheless, they are functional, just click on the leftmost white part of the hypothesis line to select it (in order to remove/de-select it for instance).
 
  
This issue is fixed in more recent versions of GTK: like GTK+ 3.18, the current for Ubuntu 16.04.
+
[[Image: FalseHypExp1.png]]
  
== Disclaimer ==
+
== Goal in Hypotheses ==
Since Rodin is continuously maintained, several unsoundness bugs which have been encountered were investigated and fixed. However, despite the total commitment of our teams to ensure the soundness of the platform, some unexpected and unknown soundness issues could remain. We would be grateful if you would report these issues to the [mailto:rodin-b-sharp-devel@lists.sourceforge.net development mailing list].
+
* '''Description''': Discharges any sequent whose goal is contained in its hypotheses
  
== About ==
+
* '''ID''': org.eventb.core.seqprover.goalInHypTac
Rodin Platform with git commit: 6980ca1<br/>
 
User Release date : 23 February 2018.
 
  
[[Category:Rodin Platform Release Notes]]
+
* '''Auto-tactic''': ''Default''
 +
 
 +
* '''Post-tactic''': ''Default''
 +
 
 +
* '''Preference display''': Goal in Hypotheses (Discharge)
 +
 
 +
* '''Interactive''': ''No''
 +
 
 +
* '''Proving interface display''': hyp
 +
 
 +
[[Image: GoalInHypExp1.png]]
 +
 
 +
== Goal Disjunct in Hypothesis ==
 +
* '''Description''': Discharges any sequent whose goal is a disjunction and one of whose disjuncts is present in the hypotheses.
 +
 
 +
* '''ID''': org.eventb.core.seqprover.goalDisjInHypTac
 +
 
 +
* '''Auto-tactic''': ''No''
 +
 
 +
* '''Post-tactic''': ''Default''
 +
 
 +
* '''Preference display''': Goal Disjunct in Hypotheses (Discharge)
 +
 
 +
* '''Interactive''': ''No''
 +
 
 +
* '''Proving interface display''': ∨ goal in hyp
 +
 
 +
[[Image: GoalDisjInHypExp1.png]]
 +
 
 +
== Functional Goal ==
 +
* '''Description''': Tries to discharge a sequent whose goal states that an expression is a function (i.e. f ∈ T1 ⇸ T2, where T1 and T2 are type expressions).
 +
 
 +
* '''Additional details''': The sequent is discharged if there is a hypothesis specifying that f is a function of any kind (i.e. partial function, total function, partial injection, total injection, partial surjection,  total surjection, bijection). More information about type expressions in Event-B is in the [[FAQ#What are type expressions in Event-B?|FAQ]] page.
 +
 
 +
* '''ID''': org.eventb.core.seqprover.funGoalTac
 +
 
 +
* '''Auto-tactic''': ''Default''
 +
 
 +
* '''Post-tactic''': ''Default''
 +
 
 +
* '''Preference display''': Functional Goal (Discharge)
 +
 
 +
* '''Interactive''': ''No''
 +
 
 +
* '''Proving interface display''': functional goal
 +
 
 +
[[Image:FunctionalGoalExp1.png]]
 +
 
 +
== Simplification Rewriter ==
 +
* '''Description''': Tries to simplify all predicates in a sequent using pre-defined simplification rewriting rules.
 +
 
 +
* '''Additional details''': The list of rewriting rules are in the following page [[All Rewrite Rules | http://wiki.event-b.org/index.php/All_Rewrite_Rules]], which are marked as ''Automatic''.
 +
 
 +
* '''ID''': org.eventb.core.seqprover.autoRewriteTac
 +
 
 +
* '''Auto-tactic''': ''Default''
 +
 
 +
* '''Post-tactic''': ''Default''
 +
 
 +
* '''Preference display''': Simplification Rewriter (Simplify)
 +
 
 +
* '''Interactive''': ''No''
 +
 
 +
* '''Proving interface display''': simplification rewrites
 +
 
 +
The example below shows the screen-shots of the step before the application of the tactic and the step just after the application of the tactic.  There are 3 rewritings have been done as follows.
 +
 
 +
<math>
 +
\begin{array}{rcl}
 +
a + 0  & \Longrightarrow & a \\
 +
a = a & \Longrightarrow & \btrue \\
 +
c * 1 & \Longrightarrow & c \\
 +
\end{array}
 +
</math>
 +
 
 +
Note that <math>\btrue</math> hypothesis is always ''dropped'' in the RODIN Platform.
 +
 
 +
Before [[Image:SimplifcationRewritesExp1.png]]
 +
 
 +
After [[Image:SimplifcationRewritesExp2.png]]
 +
 
 +
== Type Rewriter ==
 +
* '''Description''': Simplifies predicates containing type expressions such as E ∈ T to ⊤ and T = ∅ to ⊥.
 +
 
 +
* '''Additional details''': More information about type expressions in Event-B is in the [[FAQ#What are type expressions in Event-B?|FAQ]] page.
 +
 
 +
* '''ID''': org.eventb.core.seqprover.typeRewriteTac
 +
 
 +
* '''Auto-tactic''': ''Default''
 +
 
 +
* '''Post-tactic''': ''Default''
 +
 
 +
* '''Preference display''': Type Rewriter (Simplify)
 +
 
 +
* '''Interactive''': ''No''
 +
 
 +
* '''Proving interface display''': type rewrites
 +
 
 +
The example below shows the screen-shots of the step before the application of the tactic and the step just after the application of the tactic.
 +
 
 +
Before [[Image: TypeRewritesExp1.png]]
 +
 
 +
After [[Image: TypeRewritesExp2.png]]
 +
 
 +
== Implication Goal ==
 +
* '''Description''': Simplifies any sequent with an implicative goal by adding the left hand side of the implication to the hypotheses and making its right hand side the new goal.
 +
 
 +
* '''ID''': org.eventb.core.seqprover.impGoalTac
 +
 
 +
* '''Auto-tactic''': ''No''
 +
 
 +
* '''Post-tactic''': ''Default''
 +
 
 +
* '''Preference display''': Implicative Goal (Simplify)
 +
 
 +
* '''Interactive''': ''Goal''. The <math>\limp</math> symbol in the implicative goal is ''redden''. When the mouse hovers the red symbol, the label of the tactic in the context menu is ''Deduction''.
 +
 
 +
[[Image: ImpGoalInteractive1.png]]
 +
 
 +
* '''Proving interface display''': ⇒ goal
 +
 
 +
The example below shows the screen-shots of the step before the application of the tactic and the step just after the application of the tactic.
 +
 
 +
Before [[Image: ImpGoalExp1.png]]
 +
 
 +
After [[Image: ImpGoalExp2.png]]
 +
 
 +
== For-all Goal ==
 +
* '''Description''': Simplifies any sequent with a universally quantified goal by freeing all its bound variables.
 +
 
 +
* '''ID''': org.eventb.core.seqprover.forallGoalTac
 +
 
 +
* '''Auto-tactic''': ''No''
 +
 
 +
* '''Post-tactic''': ''Yes''
 +
 
 +
* '''Preference display''': For-all Goal (Simplify)
 +
 
 +
* '''Interactive''': ''Goal''. The  symbol <textcolor=red><math>\forall</math></textcolor> in the universal quantified goal is redden. When the mouse hovers the red symbol, the label of the tactic in the context menu is ''Forall instantiation''.
 +
 
 +
[[Image: ForallGoalInteractive1.png]]
 +
 
 +
* '''Proving interface display''': ∀ goal (frees ''list-of-bounded-identifiers'')
 +
 
 +
Before [[Image: ForallGoalExp1.png]]
 +
 
 +
After [[Image: ForallGoalExp2.png]]
 +
 
 +
== Exists Hypothesis ==
 +
* '''Description''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''ID''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Display''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Auto-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Post-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Interactive''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Example''': TODO
 +
 
 +
== Find Contradictory Hypothesis ==
 +
* '''Description''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''ID''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Display''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Auto-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Post-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Interactive''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Example''': TODO
 +
 
 +
== Use Equality Hypothesis ==
 +
* '''Description''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''ID''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Display''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Auto-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Post-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Interactive''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Example''': TODO
 +
 
 +
== Shrink Implicative Hypothesis ==
 +
* '''Description''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''ID''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Display''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Auto-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Post-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Interactive''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Example''': TODO
 +
 
 +
== Shrink Enumerated Set ==
 +
* '''Description''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''ID''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Display''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Auto-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Post-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Interactive''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Example''': TODO
 +
 
 +
== Implicative Hypothesis with Conjunctive RHS ==
 +
* '''Description''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''ID''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Display''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Auto-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Post-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Interactive''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Example''': TODO
 +
 
 +
== Implicative Hypothesis with Disjunctive LHS ==
 +
* '''Description''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''ID''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Display''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Auto-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Post-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Interactive''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Example''': TODO
 +
 
 +
== Conjunctive Goal ==
 +
* '''Description''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''ID''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Display''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Auto-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Post-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Interactive''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Example''': TODO
 +
 
 +
== Clarify Goal ==
 +
* '''Description''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''ID''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Display''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Auto-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Post-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Interactive''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Example''': TODO
 +
 
 +
== Functional Overriding in Goal ==
 +
* '''Description''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''ID''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Display''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Auto-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Post-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Interactive''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Example''': TODO
 +
 
 +
== Functional Overriding in Hypothesis ==
 +
* '''Description''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''ID''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Display''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Auto-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Post-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Interactive''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Example''': TODO
 +
 
 +
== Partition Rewriter ==
 +
* '''Description''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''ID''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Display''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Auto-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Post-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Interactive''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Example''': TODO
 +
 
 +
== One-Point Rule in Goal ==
 +
* '''Description''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''ID''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Display''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Auto-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Post-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Interactive''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Example''': TODO
 +
 
 +
== One-Point Rule in Hypothesis ==
 +
* '''Description''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''ID''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Display''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Auto-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Post-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Interactive''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Example''': TODO
 +
 
 +
== Bounded Goal with Finite Hypothesis ==
 +
* '''Description''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''ID''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Display''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Auto-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Post-tactic''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Interactive''': TODO
 +
 
 +
* '''Example''': TODO
 +
 
 +
== Falsify Goal ==
 +
 
 +
== conjI ==
 +
 
 +
== allI ==
 +
 
 +
== exI ==
 +
 
 +
== Remove Negation ==
 +
 
 +
== Review ==
 +
 
 +
== Proof by cases ==
 +
 
 +
== Add Hypothesis ==
 +
 
 +
== Abstract Expression ==
 +
 
 +
== Automatic Prover ==
 +
 
 +
== Post tactic ==
 +
 
 +
== Lasoo ==
 +
 
 +
== Back Tracking ==
 +
 
 +
== Prune ==
 +
 
 +
== Search Hypothesis ==
 +
 
 +
== Cache Hypothesis ==
 +
 
 +
== Previous ==
 +
 
 +
== Next ==
 +
 
 +
== Information ==
 +
 
 +
== Falsify Hypothesis ==
 +
 
 +
== Modus Ponens ==
 +
 
 +
== conjE ==
 +
 
 +
== disjE ==
 +
 
 +
== allE ==
 +
 
 +
== exE ==
 +
 
 +
== eq1 ==
 +
 
 +
== Double Implication Hypothesis ==
 +
 
 +
== cont Implication Hypothesis ==
 +
 
 +
== Functional Overriding ==
 +
 
 +
== Equality ==
 +
 
 +
== Modus Tollens ==
 +
 
 +
== Remove Membership ==
 +
 
 +
== Remove Inclusion ==
 +
 
 +
== Remove Strict-Inclusion ==
 +
 
 +
== Inclusion Set Minus Right ==
 +
 
 +
== Remove Inclusion Universal ==
 +
 
 +
== Implication Introduction ==
 +
 
 +
== Disjunction to Implication ==
 +
 
 +
== Forall Modus Ponens ==
 +
 
 +
== Next Pending Sub-goal ==
 +
 
 +
== Next Reviewed Sub-goal ==
 +
 
 +
== impAndHyp ==
 +
 
 +
== impAndGoal ==
 +
 
 +
== impOrHyp ==
 +
 
 +
== impOrGoal ==
 +
 
 +
== relImgUnionRight ==
 +
 
 +
== relImgUnionLeft ==
 +
 
 +
== Set Equality ==
 +
 
 +
== Equivalent ==
 +
 
 +
== Functional Intersection Image ==
 +
 
 +
== Functional Set Minus Image ==
 +
 
 +
== Functional Singleton Image ==
 +
 
 +
== Converse Relation ==
 +
 
 +
== Domain Distribution to the Left ==
 +
 
 +
== Domain Distribution to the Right ==
 +
 
 +
== Range Distribution to the Left ==
 +
 
 +
== Range Distribution to the Right ==
 +
 
 +
== Set Minus ==
 +
 
 +
== Conjunction and Disjunction Distribution ==
 +
 
 +
== Union Conjunction Distribution ==
 +
 
 +
== compUnionDist ==
 +
 
 +
== Domain/Range Union Distribution ==
 +
 
 +
== Relational Overriding ==
 +
 
 +
== Composition Image ==
 +
 
 +
== Domain Composition ==
 +
 
 +
== Range Composition ==
 +
 
 +
== Functional Composition Image ==
 +
 
 +
== Finite Set in Goal ==
 +
 
 +
== Finite Intersection in Goal ==
 +
 
 +
== Finite Set Minus in Goal ==
 +
 
 +
== Finite Relation in Goal ==
 +
 
 +
== Finite Relation Image in Goal ==
 +
 
 +
== Finite Domain in Goal ==
 +
 
 +
== Finite Range in Goal ==
 +
 
 +
== Finite Function in Goal ==
 +
 
 +
== Finite Function Converse in Goal ==
 +
 
 +
== Finite Functional Relational Image in Goal ==
 +
 
 +
== Finite Functional Range in Goal ==
 +
 
 +
== Finite Functional Domain in Goal ==
 +
 
 +
== Finite Minimum in Goal ==
 +
 
 +
== Finite Maximum in Goal ==
 +
 
 +
== Finite Negative in Goal ==
 +
 
 +
== Finite Positive in Goal ==
 +
 
 +
== Cardinality Comparison in Goal ==
 +
 
 +
== Cardinality Up to ==
 +
 
 +
== Partition Rewrite ==
 +
 
 +
== Arithmetic Rewrite ==
 +
 
 +
== Total Domain in Hypothesis / Goal ==

Revision as of 21:56, 9 March 2010

This page contains descriptions of the available proof tactics within the RODIN Platform.

For each tactic, the descriptions is as follows:

  • Description: A high-level description of the tactic. This will be the description appeared in the RODIN Platform preferences.
  • Additional details: (Optional) Details explanation of the tactic.
  • ID: An unique ID associated with the tactic.
  • Auto-tactic: No: the tactic cannot be added as an auto-tactic. Yes: the tactic can be added as an auto-tactic. Default: the tactic is a default auto-tactic.
  • Post-tactic: No: the tactic cannot be added as a post-tactic. Yes: the tactic can be added as a post-tactic. Default: the tactic is a default post-tactic.
  • Preference display: Information on how an application of the tactic is displayed in the auto-tactic preference or the post-tactic preference.
  • Interactive: No: the tactic cannot be invoked interactively. Global: The tactic can be invoked from the Proof Control. Goal: The tactic can be invoked from the goal view. Hypothesis: The tactic can be invoked from the hypothesis view. If the tactic can be invoked interactively (i.e. either Global, Goal or Hypothesis), more information about how this could be done will be given. Note that since the Post-tactics can be launched manually, any tactics that can be included in the post-tactic in principle can be invoked interactively via the post-tactic. Here No only means that there is no separate invocation for this specific tactic.
  • Proving interface display: Example(s) on how an application of this tactic can be seen from the proving interface of the RODIN Platform.

Contents

True Goal

  • Description: Discharges any sequent whose goal is '⊤' (logical true).
  • ID: org.eventb.core.seqprover.trueGoalTac
  • Auto-tactic: Default
  • Post-tactic: Default
  • Preference display: True Goal (Discharge)
  • Interactive: No
  • Proving interface display: ⊤ goal

TrueGoalExp1.png

False Hypothesis

  • Description: Discharges any sequent containing a '⊥' hypothesis
  • ID: org.eventb.core.seqprover.falseHypTac
  • Auto-tactic: Default
  • Post-tactic: Default
  • Preference display: False Hypothesis (Discharge)
  • Interactive: No
  • Proving interface display: ⊥ hyp

FalseHypExp1.png

Goal in Hypotheses

  • Description: Discharges any sequent whose goal is contained in its hypotheses
  • ID: org.eventb.core.seqprover.goalInHypTac
  • Auto-tactic: Default
  • Post-tactic: Default
  • Preference display: Goal in Hypotheses (Discharge)
  • Interactive: No
  • Proving interface display: hyp

GoalInHypExp1.png

Goal Disjunct in Hypothesis

  • Description: Discharges any sequent whose goal is a disjunction and one of whose disjuncts is present in the hypotheses.
  • ID: org.eventb.core.seqprover.goalDisjInHypTac
  • Auto-tactic: No
  • Post-tactic: Default
  • Preference display: Goal Disjunct in Hypotheses (Discharge)
  • Interactive: No
  • Proving interface display: ∨ goal in hyp

GoalDisjInHypExp1.png

Functional Goal

  • Description: Tries to discharge a sequent whose goal states that an expression is a function (i.e. f ∈ T1 ⇸ T2, where T1 and T2 are type expressions).
  • Additional details: The sequent is discharged if there is a hypothesis specifying that f is a function of any kind (i.e. partial function, total function, partial injection, total injection, partial surjection, total surjection, bijection). More information about type expressions in Event-B is in the FAQ page.
  • ID: org.eventb.core.seqprover.funGoalTac
  • Auto-tactic: Default
  • Post-tactic: Default
  • Preference display: Functional Goal (Discharge)
  • Interactive: No
  • Proving interface display: functional goal

FunctionalGoalExp1.png

Simplification Rewriter

  • Description: Tries to simplify all predicates in a sequent using pre-defined simplification rewriting rules.
  • ID: org.eventb.core.seqprover.autoRewriteTac
  • Auto-tactic: Default
  • Post-tactic: Default
  • Preference display: Simplification Rewriter (Simplify)
  • Interactive: No
  • Proving interface display: simplification rewrites

The example below shows the screen-shots of the step before the application of the tactic and the step just after the application of the tactic. There are 3 rewritings have been done as follows.


\begin{array}{rcl}
 a + 0  & \Longrightarrow & a \\
 a = a & \Longrightarrow & \btrue \\
 c * 1 & \Longrightarrow & c \\
\end{array}

Note that \btrue hypothesis is always dropped in the RODIN Platform.

Before SimplifcationRewritesExp1.png

After SimplifcationRewritesExp2.png

Type Rewriter

  • Description: Simplifies predicates containing type expressions such as E ∈ T to ⊤ and T = ∅ to ⊥.
  • Additional details: More information about type expressions in Event-B is in the FAQ page.
  • ID: org.eventb.core.seqprover.typeRewriteTac
  • Auto-tactic: Default
  • Post-tactic: Default
  • Preference display: Type Rewriter (Simplify)
  • Interactive: No
  • Proving interface display: type rewrites

The example below shows the screen-shots of the step before the application of the tactic and the step just after the application of the tactic.

Before TypeRewritesExp1.png

After TypeRewritesExp2.png

Implication Goal

  • Description: Simplifies any sequent with an implicative goal by adding the left hand side of the implication to the hypotheses and making its right hand side the new goal.
  • ID: org.eventb.core.seqprover.impGoalTac
  • Auto-tactic: No
  • Post-tactic: Default
  • Preference display: Implicative Goal (Simplify)
  • Interactive: Goal. The \limp symbol in the implicative goal is redden. When the mouse hovers the red symbol, the label of the tactic in the context menu is Deduction.

ImpGoalInteractive1.png

  • Proving interface display: ⇒ goal

The example below shows the screen-shots of the step before the application of the tactic and the step just after the application of the tactic.

Before ImpGoalExp1.png

After ImpGoalExp2.png

For-all Goal

  • Description: Simplifies any sequent with a universally quantified goal by freeing all its bound variables.
  • ID: org.eventb.core.seqprover.forallGoalTac
  • Auto-tactic: No
  • Post-tactic: Yes
  • Preference display: For-all Goal (Simplify)
  • Interactive: Goal. The symbol <textcolor=red>\forall</textcolor> in the universal quantified goal is redden. When the mouse hovers the red symbol, the label of the tactic in the context menu is Forall instantiation.

ForallGoalInteractive1.png

  • Proving interface display: ∀ goal (frees list-of-bounded-identifiers)

Before ForallGoalExp1.png

After ForallGoalExp2.png

Exists Hypothesis

  • Description: TODO
  • ID: TODO
  • Display: TODO
  • Auto-tactic: TODO
  • Post-tactic: TODO
  • Interactive: TODO
  • Example: TODO

Find Contradictory Hypothesis

  • Description: TODO
  • ID: TODO
  • Display: TODO
  • Auto-tactic: TODO
  • Post-tactic: TODO
  • Interactive: TODO
  • Example: TODO

Use Equality Hypothesis

  • Description: TODO
  • ID: TODO
  • Display: TODO
  • Auto-tactic: TODO
  • Post-tactic: TODO
  • Interactive: TODO
  • Example: TODO

Shrink Implicative Hypothesis

  • Description: TODO
  • ID: TODO
  • Display: TODO
  • Auto-tactic: TODO
  • Post-tactic: TODO
  • Interactive: TODO
  • Example: TODO

Shrink Enumerated Set

  • Description: TODO
  • ID: TODO
  • Display: TODO
  • Auto-tactic: TODO
  • Post-tactic: TODO
  • Interactive: TODO
  • Example: TODO

Implicative Hypothesis with Conjunctive RHS

  • Description: TODO
  • ID: TODO
  • Display: TODO
  • Auto-tactic: TODO
  • Post-tactic: TODO
  • Interactive: TODO
  • Example: TODO

Implicative Hypothesis with Disjunctive LHS

  • Description: TODO
  • ID: TODO
  • Display: TODO
  • Auto-tactic: TODO
  • Post-tactic: TODO
  • Interactive: TODO
  • Example: TODO

Conjunctive Goal

  • Description: TODO
  • ID: TODO
  • Display: TODO
  • Auto-tactic: TODO
  • Post-tactic: TODO
  • Interactive: TODO
  • Example: TODO

Clarify Goal

  • Description: TODO
  • ID: TODO
  • Display: TODO
  • Auto-tactic: TODO
  • Post-tactic: TODO
  • Interactive: TODO
  • Example: TODO

Functional Overriding in Goal

  • Description: TODO
  • ID: TODO
  • Display: TODO
  • Auto-tactic: TODO
  • Post-tactic: TODO
  • Interactive: TODO
  • Example: TODO

Functional Overriding in Hypothesis

  • Description: TODO
  • ID: TODO
  • Display: TODO
  • Auto-tactic: TODO
  • Post-tactic: TODO
  • Interactive: TODO
  • Example: TODO

Partition Rewriter

  • Description: TODO
  • ID: TODO
  • Display: TODO
  • Auto-tactic: TODO
  • Post-tactic: TODO
  • Interactive: TODO
  • Example: TODO

One-Point Rule in Goal

  • Description: TODO
  • ID: TODO
  • Display: TODO
  • Auto-tactic: TODO
  • Post-tactic: TODO
  • Interactive: TODO
  • Example: TODO

One-Point Rule in Hypothesis

  • Description: TODO
  • ID: TODO
  • Display: TODO
  • Auto-tactic: TODO
  • Post-tactic: TODO
  • Interactive: TODO
  • Example: TODO

Bounded Goal with Finite Hypothesis

  • Description: TODO
  • ID: TODO
  • Display: TODO
  • Auto-tactic: TODO
  • Post-tactic: TODO
  • Interactive: TODO
  • Example: TODO

Falsify Goal

conjI

allI

exI

Remove Negation

Review

Proof by cases

Add Hypothesis

Abstract Expression

Automatic Prover

Post tactic

Lasoo

Back Tracking

Prune

Search Hypothesis

Cache Hypothesis

Previous

Next

Information

Falsify Hypothesis

Modus Ponens

conjE

disjE

allE

exE

eq1

Double Implication Hypothesis

cont Implication Hypothesis

Functional Overriding

Equality

Modus Tollens

Remove Membership

Remove Inclusion

Remove Strict-Inclusion

Inclusion Set Minus Right

Remove Inclusion Universal

Implication Introduction

Disjunction to Implication

Forall Modus Ponens

Next Pending Sub-goal

Next Reviewed Sub-goal

impAndHyp

impAndGoal

impOrHyp

impOrGoal

relImgUnionRight

relImgUnionLeft

Set Equality

Equivalent

Functional Intersection Image

Functional Set Minus Image

Functional Singleton Image

Converse Relation

Domain Distribution to the Left

Domain Distribution to the Right

Range Distribution to the Left

Range Distribution to the Right

Set Minus

Conjunction and Disjunction Distribution

Union Conjunction Distribution

compUnionDist

Domain/Range Union Distribution

Relational Overriding

Composition Image

Domain Composition

Range Composition

Functional Composition Image

Finite Set in Goal

Finite Intersection in Goal

Finite Set Minus in Goal

Finite Relation in Goal

Finite Relation Image in Goal

Finite Domain in Goal

Finite Range in Goal

Finite Function in Goal

Finite Function Converse in Goal

Finite Functional Relational Image in Goal

Finite Functional Range in Goal

Finite Functional Domain in Goal

Finite Minimum in Goal

Finite Maximum in Goal

Finite Negative in Goal

Finite Positive in Goal

Cardinality Comparison in Goal

Cardinality Up to

Partition Rewrite

Arithmetic Rewrite

Total Domain in Hypothesis / Goal