0
$\begingroup$

Would anyone care to explain how can we deduce the Loop Invariance rule from the Reflexive Transitive Closure rule in PDL:

$$\frac{\psi\rightarrow (\phi\vee [\alpha]\psi)}{\psi\rightarrow [\alpha^*]\phi}$$? to: $$\frac{(\phi\vee\langle\alpha\rangle\psi)\rightarrow\psi}{\langle\alpha^*\rangle\phi\rightarrow\psi}$$

I've already deduced that $$\frac{(\phi\vee\langle\alpha\rangle\psi)\rightarrow\psi}{\langle\alpha^*\rangle\phi\rightarrow\psi}$$ is equivalent to $$ \frac{\psi \rightarrow [\alpha]\psi}{\psi \rightarrow [\alpha^*]\psi} \enspace, $$ if that helps.

Where $\alpha$ is a program, $\phi,\psi$ are formulas and $\langle\alpha\rangle$ is the diamond from PDL.

  • 0
    Is [this](http://math.stackexchange.com/a/2103826/123852) what you are looking for? – 2017-02-07
  • 0
    I just noted that you asked the other question as well. The last rule you show is the loop invariance rule and $\psi$ is the invariant, while $\alpha$ is the loop body. – 2017-02-07
  • 0
    @FabioSomenzi Now I'm trying to deduce $\psi\rightarrow\phi$ and $\psi\rightarrow[\alpha]\phi$ from the last rule. – 2017-02-07
  • 1
    From the loop invariance rule alone, you cannot derive $\psi \rightarrow \psi$. However, if you assume $\psi \rightarrow \psi$ and $\psi \rightarrow [\alpha]\psi$, then the loop invariance rule allows you to conclude that $\psi \rightarrow [\alpha^*]\phi$. – 2017-02-08
  • 1
    Also note that the invariance rule is not equivalent to the dual of the reflexive transitive closure rule. Rather, it's a special case of it. – 2017-02-08
  • 0
    @FabioSomenzi Thanks alot for both suggestions and explanations! – 2017-02-08
  • 1
    You are welcome. Actually, I mistyped in one of the comments above. I meant $\psi \rightarrow \phi$, not the tautologous $\psi \rightarrow \psi$. – 2017-02-08

0 Answers 0