Commit 2f0164f4 authored by Jacques-Henri Jourdan's avatar Jacques-Henri Jourdan
Browse files

Expand the explanation of uPred as a subset of sProp monotonous predicates

parent bf73b3b9
......@@ -28,7 +28,20 @@ Record uPred (M : ucmraT) : Type := IProp {
are monotonous both with respect to the step index and with
respect to x. However, that would essentially require changing
(by making it more complicated) the model of many connectives of
the logic, which we don't want. *)
the logic, which we don't want.
This sub-COFE is the sub-COFE of monotonous sProp predicates P
such that the following sProp assertion is valid:
∀ x, (V(x) → P(x)) → P(x)
Where V is the validity predicate.
Another way of saying that this is equivalent to this definition of
uPred is to notice that our definition of uPred is equivalent to
quotienting the COFE of monotonous sProp predicates with the
following (sProp) equivalence relation:
P1 ≡ P2 := ∀ x, V(x) → (P1(x) ↔ P2(x))
whose equivalence classes appear to all have one only canonical
representative such that ∀ x, (V(x) → P(x)) → P(x).
*)
uPred_closed n1 n2 x : uPred_holds n1 x n2 n1 {n2} x uPred_holds n2 x
}.
Arguments uPred_holds {_} _ _ _ : simpl never.
......
Markdown is supported
0% or .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment