diff options
author | Nguyễn Gia Phong <mcsinyx@disroot.org> | 2021-11-27 16:09:14 +0700 |
---|---|---|
committer | Nguyễn Gia Phong <mcsinyx@disroot.org> | 2021-11-27 16:09:14 +0700 |
commit | ac4d614cb0223be8167cc73fe6eaa440bbed74a7 (patch) | |
tree | 33a3fcc017a5ed42ac7e70a99e262e7c76e0b74b /blog | |
parent | 8b52b04c03a34b2fc53c11b8535aaefac0490370 (diff) | |
download | site-ac4d614cb0223be8167cc73fe6eaa440bbed74a7.tar.gz |
Clean up mistakes
Diffstat (limited to 'blog')
-rw-r--r-- | blog/boolin.md | 42 |
1 files changed, 22 insertions, 20 deletions
diff --git a/blog/boolin.md b/blog/boolin.md index 6acae55..00f118f 100644 --- a/blog/boolin.md +++ b/blog/boolin.md @@ -137,12 +137,12 @@ definitions of an environment marker \[\begin{aligned} (e_1, \ldots, e_{11}) &\mapsto \bigvee_{\imath = 1}^n\bigwedge_{\jmath = 1}^{f(\imath)} - x(\jmath)\left(e_{k(\jmath)}\right)\\ + x(\imath, \jmath)\left(e_{k(\imath, \jmath)}\right)\\ (e_1, \ldots, e_{11}) &\mapsto \bigwedge_{\imath = 1}^n\bigvee_{\jmath = 1}^{f(\imath)} - x(\jmath)\left(e_{k(\jmath)}\right) + x(\imath, \jmath)\left(e_{k(\imath, \jmath)}\right) \end{aligned}\] -where $n \in \N$, $f: \N^* \to \N^*$, $x: \N^* \to X$, $k: \N^* \to I$ +where $n \in \N$, $f: \N_1 \to \N_1$, $x: \N_1^2 \to X$, $k: \N_1^2 \to I$ and an empty Boolean expression is implicitly $c_\top$. Now it is possible to formalize inclusion for markers as @@ -152,55 +152,57 @@ Thus, checking if a marker includes another is equivalent to evaluating the following expression, for all $(e_1, \ldots, e_{11}) \in E$ \[\begin{aligned} r &= \bigvee_{\imath' = 1}^{n'}\bigwedge_{\jmath' = 1}^{f'(\imath')} - x'(\jmath')\left(e_{k'(\jmath')}\right) + x'(\imath', \jmath')\left(e_{k'(\imath', \jmath')}\right) \le \bigwedge_{\imath = 1}^n\bigvee_{\jmath = 1}^{f(\imath)} - x(\jmath)\left(e_{k(\jmath)}\right)\\ + x(\imath, \jmath)\left(e_{k(\imath, \jmath)}\right)\\ &= \bigwedge_{\imath' = 1}^{n'}\left(\bigwedge_{\jmath' = 1}^{f'(\imath')} - x'(\jmath')\left(e_{k'(\jmath')}\right) + x'(\imath', \jmath')\left(e_{k'(\imath', \jmath')}\right) \le \bigwedge_{\imath = 1}^n\bigvee_{\jmath = 1}^{f(\imath)} - x(\jmath)\left(e_{k(\jmath)}\right)\right)\\ + x(\imath, \jmath)\left(e_{k(\imath, \jmath)}\right)\right)\\ &= \bigwedge_{\imath' = 1}^{n'}\bigwedge_{\imath = 1}^n \left(\bigwedge_{\jmath' = 1}^{f'(\imath')} - x'(\jmath')\left(e_{k'(\jmath')}\right) + x'(\imath', \jmath')\left(e_{k'(\imath', \jmath')}\right) \le \bigvee_{\jmath = 1}^{f(\imath)} - x(\jmath)\left(e_{k(\jmath)}\right)\right) + x(\imath, \jmath)\left(e_{k(\imath, \jmath)}\right)\right) \end{aligned}\] where $r$ is whether the original marker (defined by $n$, $f$, $x$ and $k$) includes the declared one (defined by $n'$, $f'$, $x'$ and $k'$). Let \[\begin{aligned} g(\imath, \ell) &= \{\jmath \mid \jmath \in [1, f(\imath)] - \land k(\jmath) = \ell\}\\ + \land k(\imath, \jmath) = \ell\}\\ g'(\imath, \ell) &= \{\jmath \mid \jmath \in [1, f'(\imath)] - \land k'(\jmath) = \ell\} + \land k'(\imath, \jmath) = \ell\} \end{aligned}\] and assume $e_1, \ldots, e_{11}$ are orthogonal, we have \[\begin{aligned} r &= \bigwedge_{\imath' = 1}^{n'}\bigwedge_{\imath = 1}^n\bigvee_{\ell \in I} \left(\bigwedge_{\jmath' \in g'(\imath', \ell)} - x'(\jmath')\left(e_{\ell}\right) + x'(\imath', \jmath')\left(e_{\ell}\right) \le \bigvee_{\jmath \in g(\imath, \ell)} - x(\jmath)\left(e_{\ell}\right)\right)\\ + x(\imath, \jmath)\left(e_{\ell}\right)\right)\\ &= \bigwedge_{\imath' = 1}^{n'}\bigwedge_{\imath = 1}^n\bigvee_{\ell \in I} \left(\bigwedge_{\jmath' \in g'(\imath', \ell)} - x'(\jmath')\left(e_{\ell}\right) + x'(\imath', \jmath')\left(e_{\ell}\right) \land \lnot \bigvee_{\jmath \in g(\imath, \ell)} - x(\jmath)\left(e_{\ell}\right) = \bot\right) + x(\imath, \jmath)\left(e_{\ell}\right) = \bot\right) \end{aligned}\] where $\bot$ is the Boolean algebra bottom element. By [De Morgan's laws], \[\begin{aligned} r &= \bigwedge_{\imath' = 1}^{n'}\bigwedge_{\imath = 1}^n\bigvee_{\ell \in I} \left(\bigwedge_{\jmath' \in g'(\imath', \ell)} - x'(\jmath')\left(e_{\ell}\right) + x'(\imath', \jmath')\left(e_{\ell}\right) \land \bigwedge_{\jmath \in g(\imath, \ell)} - \lnot x(\jmath)\left(e_{\ell}\right) = \bot\right) + \lnot x(\imath, \jmath)\left(e_{\ell}\right) = \bot\right) \end{aligned}\] Essentially, checking if -\[\bigwedge_{\jmath' \in g'(\imath', \ell)} x'(\jmath')\left(e_{\ell}\right) +\[\bigwedge_{\jmath' \in g'(\imath', \ell)} + x'(\imath', \jmath')\left(e_{\ell}\right) \land \bigwedge_{\jmath \in g(\imath, \ell)} - \lnot x(\jmath)\left(e_{\ell}\right)\] + \lnot x(\imath, \jmath)\left(e_{\ell}\right)\] is unsatisfiable for all $e_{\ell}$ is a [SAT problem] which we can write -a solver for. +a solver for. Indeed, the original expression could be formulated as a SAT, +but it would be more complex due to the multiple dimensions of environments. ## Implementation |