Equational Reasoning

This module provides syntax for equational reasoning with different relations. Instead of writing nested function applications, you can write chain-of-reasoning proofs that read like mathematical prose.

For Equivalence Relations

Given an equivalence relation ∼, you can write:

begin
  a ∼⟨ proof-a∼b ⟩
  b ∼⟨ proof-b∼c ⟩
  c ∎

Instead of: transitive proof-a∼b proof-b∼c

For Preorder Relations

Given a preorder ≤, you can write:

begin
  x ≤⟨ proof-x≤y ⟩
  y ≤⟨ proof-y≤z ⟩
  z ∎

Instead of: transitive proof-x≤y proof-y≤z

---

module plumbing.EquationalReasoning where

open import Relation.Binary.PropositionalEquality using (_≡_)

Reasoning for Equivalence Relations

module ∼-Reasoning
  {A : Set}
  (_∼_ : A → A → Set)
  (reflexive : ∀ {x} → x ∼ x)
  (symmetric : ∀ {x y} → x ∼ y → y ∼ x)
  (transitive : ∀ {x y z} → x ∼ y → y ∼ z → x ∼ z)
  where

  infix   _∎
  infixr  _∼⟨_⟩_ _≈⟨_⟩_
  infix   begin_

  -- Start a reasoning chain
  begin_ : ∀ {x y} → x ∼ y → x ∼ y
  begin p = p

  -- Step forward: x ∼ y and y ∼ z implies x ∼ z
  _∼⟨_⟩_ : ∀ x {y z} → x ∼ y → y ∼ z → x ∼ z
  x ∼⟨ p ⟩ q = transitive p q

  -- Alternative syntax with ≈ symbol (same as ∼)
  _≈⟨_⟩_ : ∀ x {y z} → x ∼ y → y ∼ z → x ∼ z
  x ≈⟨ p ⟩ q = transitive p q

  -- End a reasoning chain
  _∎ : ∀ x → x ∼ x
  x ∎ = reflexive

  -- Backward step: x ∼ y follows from y ∼ x by symmetry
  _∼˘⟨_⟩_ : ∀ x {y z} → y ∼ x → y ∼ z → x ∼ z
  x ∼˘⟨ p ⟩ q = transitive (symmetric p) q

Reasoning for Preorder Relations

module ≤-Reasoning
  {A : Set}
  (_≤_ : A → A → Set)
  (reflexive : ∀ {x} → x ≤ x)
  (transitive : ∀ {x y z} → x ≤ y → y ≤ z → x ≤ z)
  where

  infix   _∎
  infixr  _≤⟨_⟩_
  infix   begin_

  -- Start a reasoning chain
  begin_ : ∀ {x y} → x ≤ y → x ≤ y
  begin p = p

  -- Step forward: x ≤ y and y ≤ z implies x ≤ z
  _≤⟨_⟩_ : ∀ x {y z} → x ≤ y → y ≤ z → x ≤ z
  x ≤⟨ p ⟩ q = transitive p q

  -- End a reasoning chain
  _∎ : ∀ x → x ≤ x
  x ∎ = reflexive

Reasoning for Propositional Equality

For completeness, we also provide reasoning for ≡ (though Agda’s standard library has this).

module ≡-Reasoning where
  open import Relation.Binary.PropositionalEquality using (trans; sym; refl)

  infix   _∎
  infixr  _≡⟨_⟩_ _≡˘⟨_⟩_
  infix   begin_

  -- Start a reasoning chain
  begin_ : ∀ {A : Set} {x y : A} → x ≡ y → x ≡ y
  begin p = p

  -- Step forward: x ≡ y and y ≡ z implies x ≡ z
  _≡⟨_⟩_ : ∀ {A : Set} (x : A) {y z : A} → x ≡ y → y ≡ z → x ≡ z
  x ≡⟨ p ⟩ q = trans p q

  -- Backward step: x ≡ y follows from y ≡ x by symmetry
  _≡˘⟨_⟩_ : ∀ {A : Set} (x : A) {y z : A} → y ≡ x → y ≡ z → x ≡ z
  x ≡˘⟨ p ⟩ q = trans (sym p) q

  -- End a reasoning chain
  _∎ : ∀ {A : Set} (x : A) → x ≡ x
  x ∎ = refl

Examples

Here are some example usages:

module Examples where
  open import definitions.chapter1.EquivalenceRelation using (IsEquivalence)
  open import definitions.chapter1.Relation using (BinRel)

  -- Example: Using ∼-Reasoning
  module EquivExample
    {A : Set}
    (_∼_ : BinRel A)
    (equiv : IsEquivalence _∼_)
    where

    open IsEquivalence equiv
    open ∼-Reasoning _∼_ reflexive symmetric transitive

    -- Instead of: transitive (transitive a∼b b∼c) c∼d
    -- We can write:
    example : ∀ {a b c d} → a ∼ b → b ∼ c → c ∼ d → a ∼ d
    example {a} {b} {c} {d} a∼b b∼c c∼d =
      begin
        a ∼⟨ a∼b ⟩
        b ∼⟨ b∼c ⟩
        c ∼⟨ c∼d ⟩
        d ∎

  -- Example: Using ≡-Reasoning
  module EqualityExample where
    open ≡-Reasoning

    example : ∀ {A : Set} {a b c : A} → a ≡ b → b ≡ c → a ≡ c
    example {a = a} {b} {c} a≡b b≡c =
      begin
        a ≡⟨ a≡b ⟩
        b ≡⟨ b≡c ⟩
        c ∎