[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [tlaplus] Q about the existential quantifier
I misspoke: even the implication
[](\E x : F) => \EE x : []F
is not valid in general, but it is valid if F is a state predicate, or somewhat more generally, if x does not occur in the scope of temporal operators. For example, assume that v is a state variable, then
[](\E x : x = v /\ \E y : [](x=y))
is valid (it suffices at every instant to take x = v, y=x and since both x and y are rigid variables their values never change), but the formula
\EE x : [](x = v /\ \E y : [](x=y))
will not hold in general: the first conjunct requires that x and v always have the same value, but the second conjunct requires that x remains constant, which is impossible if v changes during the behavior.
For an arbitrary formula F(x), we only have
[](\E x : F(x)) => \EE x : [](\E y : y=x /\ F(y))
but this formula does not appear to be very useful.
Sincere apologies: temporal quantifiers are really delicate!
Stephan
On Saturday, May 29, 2021 at 8:42:23 AM UTC+2 Stephan Merz wrote:
Hello,
the implication
[](\E x : F) => \EE x : []F
is indeed valid. The reverse implication need not hold. For example,
\EE x : []<> << x' # x >>_x
is valid, but
[] \E x : <> << x' # x >>_x
is a contradiction. If F is a state predicate then
(\EE x : []F) => [](\E x : F)
is valid.
Stephan
hello, the Specifying Systems book says that a regular existentially quantified variable functions as a constant. And from the definition this does seem to be the case
\sigma |= (\E x: F) == \E x: (\sigma |= F)
where \sigma is a trace. However, if I have
[] (\E x: F)
its now possible for each state of \sigma to have a different value of x and satisfy this formula. But this now seems closer to a temporal existential. So would it be equivalent to
\EE x: [] F
?
thanks
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "tlaplus" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tlaplus+unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tlaplus/e67f7647-1283-4033-a9b3-f25a4ebd4b2an%40googlegroups.com.