Click on a command or tactic to see a detailed view of its use.

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% %% This example demonstrates when schematic polymorphism fails to prove %% properties about polymorphic specifications %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Define eq : A -> A -> prop by eq X X. Type p A -> o. Theorem eq_non_schm[A,B] : forall (X:A) (Y:B), eq (p X) (p Y) -> false.intros. %% The following case analysis fails for the following reason. %% Whether (p X) is equal to (p Y) depends on whether X and Y has %% identical types, i.e., whether A and B can be made equal. Since A %% and B are treated as "black boxes", examination of their identity %% is not allowed. % case H1. skip.%% The following is a theorem that does not have %% a schematic proof. Theorem true_thm_with_no_schematic_proof [A,B]: forall (X:A) (F:A -> B), exists (Y:B), (eq (p X) (p Y)) \/ (eq (p X) (p Y) -> false).%% This theorem has a proof as follows: %% Case 1: A = B. %% We choose Y to be X and show the right branch holds. %% Case 2: A =/= B. %% We choose Y to be (F X) and then try to prove the right branch. %% Since (p X) and (p Y) has different predicate heads, %% the right branch is trivially true. %% %% However, since the above proof inspects the types for A and B, %% it is not a schematic proof. In fact, the above theorem, also provable, %% does not have a schematic proof. skip.