Mukesh Tiwari (May 25 2022 at 17:30): Mukesh Tiwari (May 25 2022 at 17:30):Hi everyone, I am trying to prove that these two definitions are same. It is very simple but the challenge is that finding a right lemma to show that seq.foldr and List.fold_right are same (F is a type with Field axioms, Fadd : F -> F -> F, and 0 : F (additive identity of plus (Fadd)).
Lemma bigop_to_list : forall n (f : ordinal n -> F),
\big[Fadd/0]_(j <- Finite.enum (ordinal_finType n)) (f j)
= List.fold_left Fadd (List.map f (Finite.enum (ordinal_finType n))) 0.
Proof.
intros *.
rewrite List.fold_symmetric.
rewrite unlock /=.
unfold reducebig.
Search (seq.foldr).
Search (fold_right).
n : nat
f : 'I_n -> F
============================
seq.foldr (applybig \o (fun j : 'I_n => BigBody j Fadd true (f j))) 0 (Finite.enum (ordinal_finType n)) =
List.fold_right Fadd 0 (List.map f (Finite.enum (ordinal_finType n)))
goal 2 (ID 963) is:
forall x y z : F, x + (y + z) = x + y + z
goal 3 (ID 964) is:
forall y : F, 0 + y = y + 0
math-comp does not talk about fold_right at all so that's why Search gives no relevant result. However the two functions have almost the same definition, so you can try change (@seq.foldr ?A ?B) with (@List.fold_right B A).
Mukesh Tiwari (May 25 2022 at 18:02):Thanks @Li-yao
Last updated: Feb 08 2023 at 08:02 UTC