-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 94
Revisited local and global monotonicity #4794
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: develop
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
|
The comment section of ax6er should end like this: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If I'm not mistaken, that's exactly the type of theorem we will need for chains ("towers").
@ProgramCrafter You need to resolve the merge conflicts first, before we can add this to set.mm |
The conflicts are trivial to solve, but:
|
|
By the way should I add this change-set entry? |
I don't think it's mandatory as it does not impact "main", but I'd suggest you do it anyway for keeping the record. |
What do you mean by |
It named a list of theorems to expand database actually. In my experiments it wasn't capable of writing valid Metamath syntax even for expressions 😢 (guess something more agentic or with a special tool could prove theorems tho). |
Thanks! Even that is actually interesting. I'm still curious if it suggested any other theorem! FYI there is a wiki page about automated proving. |
I've got why it failed the first time! Metamath is very non-famous actually, but LLM could somewhat infer the language from actual examples. It suggests quite a bunch: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🎉 nice
Co-authored-by: Steven Nguyen <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
A good reason must be given why the theorem ~ax6er is used in the proof of ~ormkglobd! If it can be replaced by ~ax6ev, then this would be preferred. If not, maybe a theorem ~ax6erv can be proven (reversed version of ~ax6ev, such as ~ax6er is the reversed version of ~ax6e).
set.mm
Outdated
@@ -20730,6 +20738,11 @@ theorem as an axiom of set theory (Axiom 0 of [Kunen] p. 10). In the | |||
ax6 $p |- -. A. x -. x = y $= | |||
( weq wex wn wal ax6e df-ex mpbi ) ABCZADJEAFEABGJAHI $. | |||
|
|||
$( Commuted form of ~ ax6e . (Contributed by BJ, 15-Sep-2018.) | |||
(New usage is discouraged.) $) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why was this used and moved to main, although its usage is declared to be discouraged? There should be a very good reason for using such a theorem! The comment of ~ ax6e, which is also discouraged to be used, says that ~ax6ev should be used instead. Why is this not possible (in the proof of ~ormkglobd)?
@benjub this theorem was in your mathbox before. What was your intention to create it? Why is it used in the proof of ~exlimiieq2 (only)?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I tried to inline its proof and use ax6ev (with appropriate $d conditions), and metamath-exe did not report any error nor unified the proof correctly (i.e. treated the full theorem as unproved). Should be possible though.
@avekens I'm OK if you amend the proof to avoid usage of ~ ax6er too.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There is aready a reversed version of ~ax6ev in set.mm: ~ax6evr. This should be applicable instead of ~ax6er resp. ~ax6ev.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Quite surprisingly metamath-exe just failed to unify setvar assignments automatically!
6723 vx=? $? setvar k
6724 vy=? $? setvar b
6725 exlimiiv.2=ax6evr $p |- E. k b = k
6726 syl2anc.3=exlimiiv $p |- ( ( ph /\ b e. ( 0 ..^ T ) ) -> ( B
` b ) R ( B ` ( b + 1 ) ) )
6727 sotrd.6=syl2anc $p |- ( ( ( ph /\ k e. ( 0 ..^ T ) ) /\ ( b
e. ZZ /\ ( k + 1 ) <_ b /\ b < T ) /\ ( B ` k ) R ( B ` b ) ) -> ( B ` b ) R (
B ` ( b + 1 ) ) )
6728 fzindd.6=sotrd $p |- ( ( ( ph /\ k e. ( 0 ..^ T ) ) /\ ( b
e. ZZ /\ ( k + 1 ) <_ b /\ b < T ) /\ ( B ` k ) R ( B ` b ) ) -> ( B ` k ) R (
B ` ( b + 1 ) ) )
MM-PA> assign 6724 vb
MM-PA> assign 6723 vk
CONGRATULATIONS! The proof is complete. Use SAVE NEW_PROOF to save it.
Note: The Proof Assistant does not detect $d violations. After saving
the proof, you should verify it with VERIFY PROOF.
MM-PA> save new_p
/ or nothing <nothing>?
The new proof of "ormkglobd" has been saved internally.
Remember to use WRITE SOURCE to save changes permanently.
MM-PA> q
Exiting the Proof Assistant. Type EXIT again to exit Metamath.
MM> ve pr *
0 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
..................................................
All proofs in the database were verified in 4.29 s.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yeah I think automatic one step proofs and unifications happen when doing improve all
Please move ax6er back tio BJ mathbox (and remove discouraged tag), so restore it as it was before. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
(wait I cannot request changes on my own PR?
it will probably be a draft until @benjub 's answer)
set.mm
Outdated
@@ -578732,6 +578727,11 @@ References are made to the second edition (1927, reprinted 1963) of | |||
( wal wi 2sp gen2 nfa2 nfa1 2stdpc5 ax-mp ) ACDZBDZAEZBDCDMABDCDENCBABCFGMA | |||
CBACBHLBIJK $. | |||
|
|||
$( Commuted form of ~ ax6e . (Could be placed right after ~ ax6e ). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Apparently it could not be placed right after ~ ax6e .
@@ -131,6 +132,9 @@ Date Old New Notes | |||
30-Apr-25 idomrootle [same] Moved from SO's mathbox to main set.mm | |||
30-Apr-25 ply1ascl0 [same] Moved from TA's mathbox to main set.mm | |||
30-Apr-25 hashf1dmcdm [same] Moved from BT's mathbox to main set.mm | |||
30-Apr-25 sotrd [same] Moved from SF's mathbox to main set.mm | |||
30-Apr-25 ax6er [same] Moved from BJ's mathbox to main set.mm |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think after this entry is removed (ax6er is not moved from BJ's mathbox anymore), this PR will be fine.
No description provided.