# Theory Bisimilarity_Implies_Equivalence

theory Bisimilarity_Implies_Equivalence
imports
Logical_Equivalence
begin
section ‹Bisimilarity Implies Logical Equivalence›
context indexed_nominal_ts
begin
lemma bisimilarity_implies_equivalence_Act:
assumes "⋀P Q. P ∼⋅ Q ⟹ P ⊨ x ⟷ Q ⊨ x"
and "P ∼⋅ Q"
and "P ⊨ Act α x"
shows "Q ⊨ Act α x"
proof -
have "finite (supp Q)"
by (fact finite_supp)
with ‹P ⊨ Act α x› obtain α' x' P' where eq: "Act α x = Act α' x'" and trans: "P → ⟨α',P'⟩" and valid: "P' ⊨ x'" and fresh: "bn α' ♯* Q"
by (metis valid_Act_strong)
from ‹P ∼⋅ Q› and fresh and trans obtain Q' where trans': "Q → ⟨α',Q'⟩" and bisim': "P' ∼⋅ Q'"
by (metis bisimilar_simulation_step)
from eq obtain p where px: "x' = p ∙ x"
by (metis Act_eq_iff_perm)
with valid have "-p ∙ P' ⊨ x"
by (metis permute_minus_cancel(1) valid_eqvt)
moreover from bisim' have "(-p ∙ P') ∼⋅ (-p ∙ Q')"
by (metis bisimilar_eqvt)
ultimately have "-p ∙ Q' ⊨ x"
using ‹⋀P Q. P ∼⋅ Q ⟹ P ⊨ x ⟷ Q ⊨ x› by metis
with px have "Q' ⊨ x'"
by (metis permute_minus_cancel(1) valid_eqvt)
with eq and trans' show "Q ⊨ Act α x"
unfolding valid_Act by metis
qed
theorem bisimilarity_implies_equivalence: assumes "P ∼⋅ Q" shows "P =⋅ Q"
unfolding logically_equivalent_def proof
fix x :: "('idx, 'pred, 'act) formula"
from assms show "P ⊨ x ⟷ Q ⊨ x"
proof (induction x arbitrary: P Q)
case (Conj xset) then show ?case
by simp
next
case Not then show ?case
by simp
next
case Pred then show ?case
by (metis bisimilar_is_bisimulation is_bisimulation_def symp_def valid_Pred)
next
case (Act α x) then show ?case
by (metis bisimilar_symp bisimilarity_implies_equivalence_Act sympE)
qed
qed
end
end