#|
Copyright (C) 1994 by Computational Logic, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
This script is hereby placed in the public domain, and therefore unlimited
editing and redistribution is permitted.
NO WARRANTY
Computational Logic, Inc. PROVIDES ABSOLUTELY NO WARRANTY. THE EVENT SCRIPT
IS PROVIDED "AS IS" WITHOUT WARRANTY OF ANY KIND, EITHER EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO, ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY AND
FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. THE ENTIRE RISK AS TO THE QUALITY AND
PERFORMANCE OF THE SCRIPT IS WITH YOU. SHOULD THE SCRIPT PROVE DEFECTIVE, YOU
ASSUME THE COST OF ALL NECESSARY SERVICING, REPAIR OR CORRECTION.
IN NO EVENT WILL Computational Logic, Inc. BE LIABLE TO YOU FOR ANY DAMAGES,
ANY LOST PROFITS, LOST MONIES, OR OTHER SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL OR CONSEQUENTIAL
DAMAGES ARISING OUT OF THE USE OR INABILITY TO USE THIS SCRIPT (INCLUDING BUT
NOT LIMITED TO LOSS OF DATA OR DATA BEING RENDERED INACCURATE OR LOSSES
SUSTAINED BY THIRD PARTIES), EVEN IF YOU HAVE ADVISED US OF THE POSSIBILITY OF
SUCH DAMAGES, OR FOR ANY CLAIM BY ANY OTHER PARTY.
|#
(boot-strap nqthm)
; A Mechanical Checking of a Theorem About a Card Trick
; Robert S. Boyer, May 22, 1991
; This is a formalization, in the Nqthm logic, of a card trick theorem
; that de Bruijn taught Huet, Huet taught Moore, and Moore taught me.
; Mine differs from a treatment of the same problem by Moore in that
; he uses oracles to simulate shuffling, whereas I use a merge
; predicate.
; Here is Moore's statement of the trick:
; Suppose you have a deck of cards of even length. Suppose the cards
; alternate between red ones and black ones. Cut the deck into two
; piles, a and b. Shuffle a and b together. Then the following is
; true of the shuffled deck. If the bottom-most cards in a and b are
; of different color, then when the cards of the shuffled deck are
; taken from the top in adjacent pairs, each pair contains a card of
; each color. On the other hand, if the bottom-most cards in a and b
; are the same color, the above pairing property holds after rotating
; the shuffled deck by one card, i.e., moving the bottom card to the
; top.
#| For other references see
The Gilbreath Tick: A Case Study in Axiomatization and Proof Development in the
COQ Proof Assistant, Gerard Huet, Technical Report 1511, INRIA, September,
1991.
M. Gardner, Mathematical Recreation Column, Scientific American, Aug. 1960.,
p. 149, vol. 203, no. 2.
N. Gilbreath, Magnetic Colors, The Linking Ring, 38(5), 1958, p. 60.
|#
; Now on to my formalization. We first define the six functions
; needed in the statement of the theorem. The main, all encompassing,
; theorem is stated at the very end, and is named ``all''.
; Intuitively, we imagine that cards are arbitrary objects, but
; numbers are ``red'' and nonnumbers are ``black.''
(defn opposite-color (x y)
; This is the definition of ``opposite-color,'' which checks that its
; two arguments, x and y, are of opposite color, in the intuitive
; sense mentioned above.
(or (and (numberp x) (not (numberp y)))
(and (numberp y) (not (numberp x)))))
(defn alternating-colors (x)
; This is the definition of ``alternating-colors,'' which checks that
; its argument, x, is a list of objects whose colors alternate. In the
; base case, if the list is empty or the list has length one, then we
; say it is indeed alternating. In the inductive or recursive case,
; we require that the first two elements be of opposite color and that
; the ``rest,'' i.e., cdr, i.e., all but the first, of the list be
; alternating.
(if (or (nlistp x)
(nlistp (cdr x)))
t
(and (opposite-color (car x) (cadr x))
(alternating-colors (cdr x)))))
(defn paired-colors (x)
; This is the definition of ``paired-colors,'' which checks that its
; argument, x, is a list such that if its elements are pealed off from
; the front in pairs, the pairs are found to be of opposite color. In
; the base case, we say a list of length 0 or 1 is paired. In the
; inductive or recursive case, where the list has at least length 2,
; we insist that the first and second elements be of opposite color,
; and that the ``cddr,'' i.e., the rest of the list past the first two
; elements, is paired.
(if (or (nlistp x)
(nlistp (cdr x)))
t
(and (opposite-color (car x) (cadr x))
(paired-colors (cddr x)))))
(defn plistp (x)
; This is the definition of ``plistp,'' which checks that its argument
; is a list that ends in the standard empty list, i.e., NIL.
(if (nlistp x)
(equal x nil)
(plistp (cdr x))))
(defn shufflep (x y z)
; This is the definition of ``shufflep,'' which checks that its third
; argument, z, is a ``merge'' or ``shuffling'' of its first two
; arguments, x and y. Shufflep also requires that x, y, and z all be
; ``plistp''.
; In the base case, where z is empty, we insist that x, y, and z all
; be NIL.
; In the ``almost'' base cases in which z is not empty, but either x
; or y is empty, we insist that if x is empty, then x is NIL, y is
; equal to z, and y is ``plistp'', whereas if x is not empty but y is,
; we insist that y is NIL, x is equal to z, and x is ``plistp''.
; In the fully inductive case, where none of x, y, or z, is empty, we
; insist that either (a) the first element of x is the first element
; of z and (cdr z) is a shuffle of (cdr x) and y, or (b) the first
; element of y is the first element of z and (cdr z) is a shuffle of x
; and (cdr y).
(if (nlistp z)
(and (equal x nil)
(equal y nil)
(equal z nil))
(if (nlistp x)
(and (equal x nil)
(equal y z)
(plistp y))
(if (nlistp y)
(and (equal y nil)
(equal x z)
(plistp x))
(or (and (equal (car x) (car z))
(shufflep (cdr x) y (cdr z)))
(and (equal (car y) (car z))
(shufflep x (cdr y) (cdr z))))))))
(defn even-length (l)
; This is the definition of ``even-length,'' which checks that the
; length of its argument, l, is even. In the base cases, if l is
; empty we return true and if l has one element we return false. In
; the inductive or recursive case, we insist that (cddr l), i.e., the
; rest of l after its second element, has even length.
(if (nlistp l)
t
(if (nlistp (cdr l))
f
(even-length (cddr l)))))
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
; That ends the definitions needed to state the final theorem ``all,'' given
; at the end of this file.
; We now proceed to develop 17 auxiliary lemmas to help prove
; ``all.''
(prove-lemma al->pp (rewrite)
; If x satisfies ``alternating-colors,'' then it satisfies
; ``paired-colors.''
(implies (alternating-colors x)
(paired-colors x)))
(defn silly (x y z)
; This is a definition of the function ``silly,'' which is only
; defined to force a certain weird induction, immediately below.
; Discovering this induction was the key to getting the following
; lemma proved. Fundamentally, and intuitively, what silly does, one
; might say, risking the accusation of anthropomorphising computing,
; is ``to look into the recursion involved in checking that z is a
; merge of x and y, but doing the looking `two deep.''' One should be
; careful not to try to make any sense out of what this function
; ``returns.'' I have never even considered this matter. Instead, I
; just wanted to force an induction with three induction hypotheses, in
; which z always goes down by two cdr's, whereas x and y each go down
; by cdr's in such a way that just two cdr's are done. It is a
; ``feature'' of Nqthm that the user can force inductions to be done
; in certain ways by suggesting that the prover induct ``in the way''
; that a specified function recurses.
(if (nlistp z)
t
(list (silly (cddr x) y (cddr z))
(silly (cdr x) (cdr y) (cddr z))
(silly x (cddr y) (cddr z)))))
(prove-lemma main (rewrite)
; From a mathematical point of view, this lemma is perhaps the high
; point of this entire card trick theorem. This lemma handles the
; case in which the colors of the top cards are different.
; If z is a shuffle of x and y, and both x and y are of alternating
; color, and neither x nor y is empty, and the first element of x is
; of color opposite to the first element of y, then the elements of z
; satisfy ``paired-colors.''
(implies (and (shufflep x y z)
(alternating-colors x)
(alternating-colors y)
(listp x)
(listp y)
(opposite-color (car x) (car y)))
(paired-colors z))
; A hint for this lemma, which says, ``induct the way that `silly'
; recurses on x, y, and z.
((induct (silly x y z))))
; The closer to a gensym is the name of a lemma, the more boring and
; obvious it is. As usual in such Nqthm proofs, these tedious lemmas
; are conceived by carefully reading failed Nqthm proofs rather than
; by thinking ahead. The idea is to prove only those things which are
; suggested by Nqthm failures.
(prove-lemma f2 (rewrite)
; If d and c satisfy ``plistp'', then (append c d), i.e., the
; concatenation of c and d, is a ``shuffle'' of c and d.
(implies (and (plistp d) (plistp c))
(shufflep c d (append c d))))
(prove-lemma f3 (rewrite)
; A variation on the above.
(implies (and (plistp d) (plistp c))
(shufflep c d (append d c))))
(prove-lemma cdr-append (rewrite)
; How to drive a cdr ``through'' an append. What the ``rest,'' i.e.,
; cdr of (append c d), i.e., the concatenation of c and d, is, depends
; upon c. If c is nonempty, then the answer is (append (cdr c) d).
; Whereas if c is empty, the answer is (cdr d).
(equal (cdr (append c d))
(if (listp c)
(append (cdr c) d)
(cdr d))))
(prove-lemma f4 (rewrite)
; If w satisfies ``plistp'' and z is a shuffle of x and y, then
; (append z w) is a shuffle of (append y w) and (append z w).
(implies (and (plistp w)
(shufflep x y z))
(shufflep x (append y w) (append z w))))
(prove-lemma f5 (rewrite)
; Variation on the above.
(implies (and (plistp w)
(shufflep x y z))
(shufflep (append x w) y (append z w))))
(prove-lemma trick (rewrite)
; Other than ``main,'' the lemma ``trick'' is perhaps the only
; slightly nonobvious lemma. It is the key to reducing the case in
; which the two cut stacks start with the same color to the case in
; which they do not.
; If x and y are nonempty and z is a shuffle of x and y, then the
; result of moving the first card of z to its end is either (a) a
; shuffle of (i) the similar rotation of x and (ii) y, or (b) a
; shuffle of (i) x and (ii) the similar rotation of y.
(implies (and (listp x)
(listp y)
(shufflep x y z))
(or (shufflep (append (cdr x) (list (car x)))
y
(append (cdr z) (list (car z))))
(shufflep x
(append (cdr y) (list (car y)))
(append (cdr z) (list (car z)))))))
(prove-lemma car-append (rewrite)
; How to drive a ``car'' through an ``append''. Analogous to
; ``cdr-append.''
(equal (car (append x y))
(if (listp x)
(car x)
(car y))))
(prove-lemma f12 (rewrite)
; If adding d to the end of c is of alternating color, and d is of the
; same color as e, then adding e to the end of c is also of
; alternating color.
(implies (and (alternating-colors (append c (list d)))
(not (opposite-color d e)))
(alternating-colors (append c (list e)))))
(prove-lemma f6 (rewrite)
; Analogous to the above.
(implies (and (listp l)
(even-length l)
(alternating-colors l))
(alternating-colors (append (cdr l) (list (car l))))))
(prove-lemma g19 (rewrite)
; If c is of alternating color and the first member of c is red, i.e.,
; a number, and c has even length, and v is a number, then sticking v
; on to the end of c results in a list of alternating color.
(implies (and (alternating-colors c)
(numberp (car c))
(even-length c)
(numberp v))
(alternating-colors (append c (list v))))
; A hint for this lemma:
((induct (paired-colors c))))
(prove-lemma g20 (rewrite)
; Analogous to the foregoing.
(implies (and (alternating-colors c)
(not (numberp (car c)))
(even-length c)
(not (numberp v)))
(alternating-colors (append c (list v))))
; A hint for this lemma:
((induct (paired-colors c))))
(prove-lemma fap (rewrite)
; This is the heart of the case in which the two cut stacks begin with
; cars of the same color: the result of rotating the shuffled stack
; one car is paired.
(implies (and (shufflep x y z)
(alternating-colors x)
(alternating-colors y)
(even-length x)
(even-length y)
(not (opposite-color (car x) (car y))))
(paired-colors (append (cdr z) (list (car z)))))
; A hint for this lemma:
((use (trick)
(main (z (append (cdr z) (list (car z))))
(x x)
(y (append (cdr y) (list (car y)))))
(main (z (append (cdr z) (list (car z))))
(x (append (cdr x) (list (car x))))
(y y)))))
(prove-lemma al2 (rewrite)
; If we cut an even deck of alternating cards into two stacks which
; begin with the same color, then the two stacks have even length.
(implies (and (alternating-colors (append x y))
(even-length (append x y))
(not (opposite-color (car x) (car y))))
(and (even-length x)
(even-length y)))
; A hint for this lemma:
((induct (paired-colors x))))
(prove-lemma g16 (rewrite)
; If x is not alternating in color, then appending y to its
; end does not make the result alternating.
(implies (not (alternating-colors x))
(not (alternating-colors (append x y)))))
(prove-lemma g17 (rewrite)
; Like the above.
(implies (not (alternating-colors y))
(not (alternating-colors (append x y)))))
;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;;
; That ends the intermediate development of auxiliary lemmas. We are now
; ready for the main result.
(prove-lemma all ()
; The main theorem. Imagine x and y to be the two card stacks that
; result from cutting the original deck. The original deck is thus
; (append x y). Suppose that the original deck is of alternating
; color and of even length, and that neither x nor y is empty.
; Suppose further that z is a shuffle of x and y. If x and y start
; with cards of opposite color, then z satisfies ``paired-colors.''
; On the other hand, if x and y start with cards of opposite color,
; then the result of moving the top card of z to the end of z
; satisfies ``paired-colors.''
(implies (and (alternating-colors (append x y))
(even-length (append x y))
(shufflep x y z)
(listp x)
(listp y))
(if (opposite-color (car x) (car y))
(paired-colors z)
(paired-colors (append (cdr z) (list (car z))))))
; A hint for this lemma:
((use (fap) (main))))
; To run this list of events takes about 1 hour of cpu time on a
; Sun-3/280. To develop this list of events took about 15 hours of
; work.