Skip to content
GitLab
Explore
Sign in
Primary navigation
Search or go to…
Project
Alethe
Manage
Activity
Members
Labels
Plan
Issues
Issue boards
Milestones
Iterations
Code
Merge requests
Repository
Branches
Commits
Tags
Repository graph
Compare revisions
Locked files
Build
Pipelines
Jobs
Pipeline schedules
Test cases
Artifacts
Deploy
Releases
Model registry
Analyze
Model experiments
Help
Help
Support
GitLab documentation
Compare GitLab plans
Community forum
Contribute to GitLab
Provide feedback
Keyboard shortcuts
?
Snippets
Groups
Projects
Show more breadcrumbs
veriT
Alethe
Commits
df8503ac
Commit
df8503ac
authored
8 months ago
by
Hans-Jörg
Browse files
Options
Downloads
Patches
Plain Diff
Add index to and_pos, or_neg, and, not_or
parent
f359b2bc
Branches
devel/rules-index-arg
Branches containing commit
No related tags found
1 merge request
!9
Add index to four rules
Pipeline
#38219
passed
8 months ago
Changes
2
Pipelines
1
Hide whitespace changes
Inline
Side-by-side
Showing
2 changed files
spec/changelog.tex
+5
-1
5 additions, 1 deletion
spec/changelog.tex
spec/rule_list.tex
+6
-4
6 additions, 4 deletions
spec/rule_list.tex
with
11 additions
and
5 deletions
spec/changelog.tex
+
5
−
1
View file @
df8503ac
...
...
@@ -22,7 +22,11 @@ Breaking changes:
be
\texttt
{
(x S) (:= (y S) x)
}
.
\item
The arguments for
\proofRule
{
forall
_
inst
}
have been changed to
no longer take the shape of bindings using
\texttt
{
(:= x c)
}
.
Instead, the list of instatiation terms must follow the variable order and cover all the respective bound variables.
Instead, the list of instatiation terms must follow the variable
order and cover all the respective bound variables.
\item
The rules
\proofRule
{
and
_
pos
}
,
\proofRule
{
or
_
neg
}
,
\proofRule
{
and
}
,
\proofRule
{
not
_
or
}
now have one argument that indicates which subterm
they use.
\end{itemize}
\noindent
...
...
This diff is collapsed.
Click to expand it.
spec/rule_list.tex
+
6
−
4
View file @
df8503ac
...
...
@@ -810,7 +810,7 @@ done during clausification.
\begin{RuleDescription}
{
and
}
\begin{AletheX}
$
i
$
.
&
\ctxsep
&
$
\varphi
_
1
\land
\cdots
\land
\varphi
_
n
$
&
(
$
\dots
$
)
\\
$
j
$
.
&
\ctxsep
&
$
\varphi
_
k
$
&
(
\currule\;
$
i
$
)
\\
$
j
$
.
&
\ctxsep
&
$
\varphi
_
k
$
&
(
\currule\;
$
i
$
)
\,
k
\\
\end{AletheX}
and
$
1
\leq
k
\leq
n
$
.
\end{RuleDescription}
...
...
@@ -818,7 +818,7 @@ and $1 \leq k \leq n$.
\begin{RuleDescription}
{
not
_
or
}
\begin{AletheX}
$
i
$
.
&
\ctxsep
&
$
\neg
(
\varphi
_
1
\lor
\cdots
\lor
\varphi
_
n
)
$
&
(
$
\dots
$
)
\\
$
j
$
.
&
\ctxsep
&
$
\neg
\varphi
_
k
$
&
(
\currule\;
$
i
$
)
\\
$
j
$
.
&
\ctxsep
&
$
\neg
\varphi
_
k
$
&
(
\currule\;
$
i
$
)
\,
k
\\
\end{AletheX}
and
$
1
\leq
k
\leq
n
$
.
\end{RuleDescription}
...
...
@@ -931,7 +931,8 @@ $j$. & \ctxsep & $\neg\varphi_1, \neg\varphi_2$ & (\currule\;$i$) \\
\begin{RuleDescription}
{
and
_
pos
}
\begin{AletheX}
$
i
$
.
&
\ctxsep
&
$
\neg
(
\varphi
_
1
\land
\cdots
\land
\varphi
_
n
)
,
\varphi
_
k
$
&
\currule
\\
$
i
$
.
&
\ctxsep
&
$
\neg
(
\varphi
_
1
\land
\cdots
\land
\varphi
_
n
)
,
\varphi
_
k
$
&
\currule\,
k
\\
\end{AletheX}
with
$
1
\leq
k
\leq
n
$
.
\end{RuleDescription}
...
...
@@ -950,7 +951,8 @@ $i$. & \ctxsep & $\neg (\varphi_1 \lor \cdots \lor \varphi_n) , \varphi_1 , \dot
\begin{RuleDescription}
{
or
_
neg
}
\begin{AletheX}
$
i
$
.
&
\ctxsep
&
$
(
\varphi
_
1
\lor
\cdots
\lor
\varphi
_
n
)
,
\neg
\varphi
_
k
$
&
\currule
\\
$
i
$
.
&
\ctxsep
&
$
(
\varphi
_
1
\lor
\cdots
\lor
\varphi
_
n
)
,
\neg
\varphi
_
k
$
&
\currule\,
k
\\
\end{AletheX}
with
$
1
\leq
k
\leq
n
$
.
\end{RuleDescription}
...
...
This diff is collapsed.
Click to expand it.
Preview
0%
Loading
Try again
or
attach a new file
.
Cancel
You are about to add
0
people
to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Save comment
Cancel
Please
register
or
sign in
to comment