Skip to content

[CTL] Coinduction lemma #30

@elefthei

Description

@elefthei

The Coinduction library allows for parametrized coinduction proofs on the shallow definition of ag
but we have no way to do the same kind of proof in the deep definition, for example

We need to unfold entailsF only to do the parametrized coinduction underneath. This exposes the low-level details to the user of the deep embedding. We shouldn't do that and related #29 entailsF should be opaque.
One attempt at defining AG_coind' requires explicitly providing the coinductive relation, which is extremely tedious and cancels all the benefits of parametrized coinduction.

What would it take to do parametrized coinduction proofs without unfolding entailsF and without defining the relation R manually?

Metadata

Metadata

Assignees

No one assigned

    Labels

    No labels
    No labels

    Type

    No type

    Projects

    No projects

    Milestone

    No milestone

    Relationships

    None yet

    Development

    No branches or pull requests

    Issue actions