You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The coq-coinduction library provides a quite convenient tactic to leverage symmetry arguments in bisimulation proofs, avoiding to repeat the proof essentially to the identical in each direction.
The tactic is however quite strongly tied to the syntactic definition of a bisimulation as the intersection of a simulation and its reverse, which we lost when we generalized things to the heterogenous.
Can we recover it nicely in the cases where the proof method holds nonetheless?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
f324ee9 recovers it in the case of sbisim eq. I guess it could be generalized for any homogeneous equivalence relation, but the relevant typeclass of coq-coinduction is probably not enough for heterogeneous relations.
The
coq-coinduction
library provides a quite convenient tactic to leverage symmetry arguments in bisimulation proofs, avoiding to repeat the proof essentially to the identical in each direction.The tactic is however quite strongly tied to the syntactic definition of a bisimulation as the intersection of a simulation and its reverse, which we lost when we generalized things to the heterogenous.
Can we recover it nicely in the cases where the proof method holds nonetheless?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: