Theory Boolean_Algebras

(*  Title:      HOL/Boolean_Algebras.thy
    Author:     Brian Huffman
    Author:     Florian Haftmann
*)

section ‹Boolean Algebras›

theory Boolean_Algebras
  imports Lattices
begin

subsection ‹Abstract boolean algebra›

locale abstract_boolean_algebra = conj: abel_semigroup ‹(❙⊓)› + disj: abel_semigroup ‹(❙⊔)›
  for conj :: ‹'a ⇒ 'a ⇒ 'a›  (infixr ‹❙⊓› 70)
    and disj :: ‹'a ⇒ 'a ⇒ 'a›  (infixr ‹❙⊔› 65) +
  fixes compl :: ‹'a ⇒ 'a›  (‹❙- _› [81] 80)
    and zero :: ‹'a›  (‹❙0›)
    and one  :: ‹'a›  (‹❙1›)
  assumes conj_disj_distrib: ‹x ❙⊓ (y ❙⊔ z) = (x ❙⊓ y) ❙⊔ (x ❙⊓ z)›
    and disj_conj_distrib: ‹x ❙⊔ (y ❙⊓ z) = (x ❙⊔ y) ❙⊓ (x ❙⊔ z)›
    and conj_one_right: ‹x ❙⊓ ❙1 = x›
    and disj_zero_right: ‹x ❙⊔ ❙0 = x›
    and conj_cancel_right [simp]: ‹x ❙⊓ ❙- x = ❙0›
    and disj_cancel_right [simp]: ‹x ❙⊔ ❙- x = ❙1›
begin

sublocale conj: semilattice_neutr ‹(❙⊓)› ‹❙1›
proof
  show "x ❙⊓ ❙1 = x" for x 
    by (fact conj_one_right)
  show "x ❙⊓ x = x" for x
  proof -
    have "x ❙⊓ x = (x ❙⊓ x) ❙⊔ ❙0"
      by (simp add: disj_zero_right)
    also have "… = (x ❙⊓ x) ❙⊔ (x ❙⊓ ❙- x)"
      by simp
    also have "… = x ❙⊓ (x ❙⊔ ❙- x)"
      by (simp only: conj_disj_distrib)
    also have "… = x ❙⊓ ❙1"
      by simp
    also have "… = x"
      by (simp add: conj_one_right)
    finally show ?thesis .
  qed
qed

sublocale disj: semilattice_neutr ‹(❙⊔)› ‹❙0›
proof
  show "x ❙⊔ ❙0 = x" for x
    by (fact disj_zero_right)
  show "x ❙⊔ x = x" for x
  proof -
    have "x ❙⊔ x = (x ❙⊔ x) ❙⊓ ❙1"
      by simp
    also have "… = (x ❙⊔ x) ❙⊓ (x ❙⊔ ❙- x)"
      by simp
    also have "… = x ❙⊔ (x ❙⊓ ❙- x)"
      by (simp only: disj_conj_distrib)
    also have "… = x ❙⊔ ❙0"
      by simp
    also have "… = x"
      by (simp add: disj_zero_right)
    finally show ?thesis .
  qed
qed


subsubsection ‹Complement›

lemma complement_unique:
  assumes 1: "a ❙⊓ x = ❙0"
  assumes 2: "a ❙⊔ x = ❙1"
  assumes 3: "a ❙⊓ y = ❙0"
  assumes 4: "a ❙⊔ y = ❙1"
  shows "x = y"
proof -
  from 1 3 have "(a ❙⊓ x) ❙⊔ (x ❙⊓ y) = (a ❙⊓ y) ❙⊔ (x ❙⊓ y)"
    by simp
  then have "(x ❙⊓ a) ❙⊔ (x ❙⊓ y) = (y ❙⊓ a) ❙⊔ (y ❙⊓ x)"
    by (simp add: ac_simps)
  then have "x ❙⊓ (a ❙⊔ y) = y ❙⊓ (a ❙⊔ x)"
    by (simp add: conj_disj_distrib)
  with 2 4 have "x ❙⊓ ❙1 = y ❙⊓ ❙1"
    by simp
  then show "x = y"
    by simp
qed

lemma compl_unique: "x ❙⊓ y = ❙0 ⟹ x ❙⊔ y = ❙1 ⟹ ❙- x = y"
  by (rule complement_unique [OF conj_cancel_right disj_cancel_right])

lemma double_compl [simp]: "❙- (❙- x) = x"
proof (rule compl_unique)
  show "❙- x ❙⊓ x = ❙0"
    by (simp only: conj_cancel_right conj.commute)
  show "❙- x ❙⊔ x = ❙1"
    by (simp only: disj_cancel_right disj.commute)
qed

lemma compl_eq_compl_iff [simp]: 
  ‹❙- x = ❙- y ⟷ x = y›  (is ‹?P ⟷ ?Q›)
proof
  assume ‹?Q›
  then show ?P by simp
next
  assume ‹?P›
  then have ‹❙- (❙- x) = ❙- (❙- y)›
    by simp
  then show ?Q
    by simp
qed


subsubsection ‹Conjunction›

lemma conj_zero_right [simp]: "x ❙⊓ ❙0 = ❙0"
  using conj.left_idem conj_cancel_right by fastforce

lemma compl_one [simp]: "❙- ❙1 = ❙0"
  by (rule compl_unique [OF conj_zero_right disj_zero_right])

lemma conj_zero_left [simp]: "❙0 ❙⊓ x = ❙0"
  by (subst conj.commute) (rule conj_zero_right)

lemma conj_cancel_left [simp]: "❙- x ❙⊓ x = ❙0"
  by (subst conj.commute) (rule conj_cancel_right)

lemma conj_disj_distrib2: "(y ❙⊔ z) ❙⊓ x = (y ❙⊓ x) ❙⊔ (z ❙⊓ x)"
  by (simp only: conj.commute conj_disj_distrib)

lemmas conj_disj_distribs = conj_disj_distrib conj_disj_distrib2


subsubsection ‹Disjunction›

context
begin

interpretation dual: abstract_boolean_algebra ‹(❙⊔)› ‹(❙⊓)› compl ‹❙1› ‹❙0›
  apply standard
       apply (rule disj_conj_distrib)
      apply (rule conj_disj_distrib)
     apply simp_all
  done

lemma disj_one_right [simp]: "x ❙⊔ ❙1 = ❙1"
  by (fact dual.conj_zero_right)

lemma compl_zero [simp]: "❙- ❙0 = ❙1"
  by (fact dual.compl_one)

lemma disj_one_left [simp]: "❙1 ❙⊔ x = ❙1"
  by (fact dual.conj_zero_left)

lemma disj_cancel_left [simp]: "❙- x ❙⊔ x = ❙1"
  by (fact dual.conj_cancel_left)

lemma disj_conj_distrib2: "(y ❙⊓ z) ❙⊔ x = (y ❙⊔ x) ❙⊓ (z ❙⊔ x)"
  by (fact dual.conj_disj_distrib2)

lemmas disj_conj_distribs = disj_conj_distrib disj_conj_distrib2

end


subsubsection ‹De Morgan's Laws›

lemma de_Morgan_conj [simp]: "❙- (x ❙⊓ y) = ❙- x ❙⊔ ❙- y"
proof (rule compl_unique)
  have "(x ❙⊓ y) ❙⊓ (❙- x ❙⊔ ❙- y) = ((x ❙⊓ y) ❙⊓ ❙- x) ❙⊔ ((x ❙⊓ y) ❙⊓ ❙- y)"
    by (rule conj_disj_distrib)
  also have "… = (y ❙⊓ (x ❙⊓ ❙- x)) ❙⊔ (x ❙⊓ (y ❙⊓ ❙- y))"
    by (simp only: ac_simps)
  finally show "(x ❙⊓ y) ❙⊓ (❙- x ❙⊔ ❙- y) = ❙0"
    by (simp only: conj_cancel_right conj_zero_right disj_zero_right)
next
  have "(x ❙⊓ y) ❙⊔ (❙- x ❙⊔ ❙- y) = (x ❙⊔ (❙- x ❙⊔ ❙- y)) ❙⊓ (y ❙⊔ (❙- x ❙⊔ ❙- y))"
    by (rule disj_conj_distrib2)
  also have "… = (❙- y ❙⊔ (x ❙⊔ ❙- x)) ❙⊓ (❙- x ❙⊔ (y ❙⊔ ❙- y))"
    by (simp only: ac_simps)
  finally show "(x ❙⊓ y) ❙⊔ (❙- x ❙⊔ ❙- y) = ❙1"
    by (simp only: disj_cancel_right disj_one_right conj_one_right)
qed

context
begin

interpretation dual: abstract_boolean_algebra ‹(❙⊔)› ‹(❙⊓)› compl ‹❙1› ‹❙0›
  apply standard
       apply (rule disj_conj_distrib)
      apply (rule conj_disj_distrib)
     apply simp_all
  done

lemma de_Morgan_disj [simp]: "❙- (x ❙⊔ y) = ❙- x ❙⊓ ❙- y"
  by (fact dual.de_Morgan_conj)

end

end


subsection ‹Symmetric Difference›

locale abstract_boolean_algebra_sym_diff = abstract_boolean_algebra +
  fixes xor :: ‹'a ⇒ 'a ⇒ 'a›  (infixr ‹❙⊖› 65)
  assumes xor_def : ‹x ❙⊖ y = (x ❙⊓ ❙- y) ❙⊔ (❙- x ❙⊓ y)›
begin

sublocale xor: comm_monoid xor ‹❙0›
proof
  fix x y z :: 'a
  let ?t = "(x ❙⊓ y ❙⊓ z) ❙⊔ (x ❙⊓ ❙- y ❙⊓ ❙- z) ❙⊔ (❙- x ❙⊓ y ❙⊓ ❙- z) ❙⊔ (❙- x ❙⊓ ❙- y ❙⊓ z)"
  have "?t ❙⊔ (z ❙⊓ x ❙⊓ ❙- x) ❙⊔ (z ❙⊓ y ❙⊓ ❙- y) = ?t ❙⊔ (x ❙⊓ y ❙⊓ ❙- y) ❙⊔ (x ❙⊓ z ❙⊓ ❙- z)"
    by (simp only: conj_cancel_right conj_zero_right)
  then show "(x ❙⊖ y) ❙⊖ z = x ❙⊖ (y ❙⊖ z)"
    by (simp only: xor_def de_Morgan_disj de_Morgan_conj double_compl)
      (simp only: conj_disj_distribs conj_ac ac_simps)
  show "x ❙⊖ y = y ❙⊖ x"
    by (simp only: xor_def ac_simps)
  show "x ❙⊖ ❙0 = x"
    by (simp add: xor_def)
qed

lemma xor_def2:
  ‹x ❙⊖ y = (x ❙⊔ y) ❙⊓ (❙- x ❙⊔ ❙- y)›
proof -
  note xor_def [of x y]
  also have ‹x ❙⊓ ❙- y ❙⊔ ❙- x ❙⊓ y = ((x ❙⊔ ❙- x) ❙⊓ (❙- y ❙⊔ ❙- x)) ❙⊓ (x ❙⊔ y) ❙⊓ (❙- y ❙⊔ y)›
    by (simp add: ac_simps disj_conj_distribs)
  also have ‹… = (x ❙⊔ y) ❙⊓ (❙- x ❙⊔ ❙- y)›
    by (simp add: ac_simps)
  finally show ?thesis .
qed

lemma xor_one_right [simp]: "x ❙⊖ ❙1 = ❙- x"
  by (simp only: xor_def compl_one conj_zero_right conj_one_right disj.left_neutral)

lemma xor_one_left [simp]: "❙1 ❙⊖ x = ❙- x"
  using xor_one_right [of x] by (simp add: ac_simps)

lemma xor_self [simp]: "x ❙⊖ x = ❙0"
  by (simp only: xor_def conj_cancel_right conj_cancel_left disj_zero_right)

lemma xor_left_self [simp]: "x ❙⊖ (x ❙⊖ y) = y"
  by (simp only: xor.assoc [symmetric] xor_self xor.left_neutral)

lemma xor_compl_left [simp]: "❙- x ❙⊖ y = ❙- (x ❙⊖ y)"
  by (simp add: ac_simps flip: xor_one_left)

lemma xor_compl_right [simp]: "x ❙⊖ ❙- y = ❙- (x ❙⊖ y)"
  using xor.commute xor_compl_left by auto

lemma xor_cancel_right [simp]: "x ❙⊖ ❙- x = ❙1"
  by (simp only: xor_compl_right xor_self compl_zero)

lemma xor_cancel_left [simp]: "❙- x ❙⊖ x = ❙1"
  by (simp only: xor_compl_left xor_self compl_zero)

lemma conj_xor_distrib: "x ❙⊓ (y ❙⊖ z) = (x ❙⊓ y) ❙⊖ (x ❙⊓ z)"
proof -
  have *: "(x ❙⊓ y ❙⊓ ❙- z) ❙⊔ (x ❙⊓ ❙- y ❙⊓ z) =
        (y ❙⊓ x ❙⊓ ❙- x) ❙⊔ (z ❙⊓ x ❙⊓ ❙- x) ❙⊔ (x ❙⊓ y ❙⊓ ❙- z) ❙⊔ (x ❙⊓ ❙- y ❙⊓ z)"
    by (simp only: conj_cancel_right conj_zero_right disj.left_neutral)
  then show "x ❙⊓ (y ❙⊖ z) = (x ❙⊓ y) ❙⊖ (x ❙⊓ z)"
    by (simp (no_asm_use) only:
        xor_def de_Morgan_disj de_Morgan_conj double_compl
        conj_disj_distribs ac_simps)
qed

lemma conj_xor_distrib2: "(y ❙⊖ z) ❙⊓ x = (y ❙⊓ x) ❙⊖ (z ❙⊓ x)"
  by (simp add: conj.commute conj_xor_distrib)

lemmas conj_xor_distribs = conj_xor_distrib conj_xor_distrib2

end


subsection ‹Type classes›

class boolean_algebra = distrib_lattice + bounded_lattice + minus + uminus +
  assumes inf_compl_bot: ‹x ⊓ - x = ⊥›
    and sup_compl_top: ‹x ⊔ - x = ⊤›
  assumes diff_eq: ‹x - y = x ⊓ - y›
begin

sublocale boolean_algebra: abstract_boolean_algebra ‹(⊓)› ‹(⊔)› uminus ⊥ ⊤
  apply standard
       apply (rule inf_sup_distrib1)
      apply (rule sup_inf_distrib1)
     apply (simp_all add: ac_simps inf_compl_bot sup_compl_top)
  done

lemma compl_inf_bot: "- x ⊓ x = ⊥"
  by (fact boolean_algebra.conj_cancel_left)

lemma compl_sup_top: "- x ⊔ x = ⊤"
  by (fact boolean_algebra.disj_cancel_left)

lemma compl_unique:
  assumes "x ⊓ y = ⊥"
    and "x ⊔ y = ⊤"
  shows "- x = y"
  using assms by (rule boolean_algebra.compl_unique)

lemma double_compl: "- (- x) = x"
  by (fact boolean_algebra.double_compl)

lemma compl_eq_compl_iff: "- x = - y ⟷ x = y"
  by (fact boolean_algebra.compl_eq_compl_iff)

lemma compl_bot_eq: "- ⊥ = ⊤"
  by (fact boolean_algebra.compl_zero)

lemma compl_top_eq: "- ⊤ = ⊥"
  by (fact boolean_algebra.compl_one)

lemma compl_inf: "- (x ⊓ y) = - x ⊔ - y"
  by (fact boolean_algebra.de_Morgan_conj)

lemma compl_sup: "- (x ⊔ y) = - x ⊓ - y"
  by (fact boolean_algebra.de_Morgan_disj)

lemma compl_mono:
  assumes "x ≤ y"
  shows "- y ≤ - x"
proof -
  from assms have "x ⊔ y = y" by (simp only: le_iff_sup)
  then have "- (x ⊔ y) = - y" by simp
  then have "- x ⊓ - y = - y" by simp
  then have "- y ⊓ - x = - y" by (simp only: inf_commute)
  then show ?thesis by (simp only: le_iff_inf)
qed

lemma compl_le_compl_iff [simp]: "- x ≤ - y ⟷ y ≤ x"
  by (auto dest: compl_mono)

lemma compl_le_swap1:
  assumes "y ≤ - x"
  shows "x ≤ -y"
proof -
  from assms have "- (- x) ≤ - y" by (simp only: compl_le_compl_iff)
  then show ?thesis by simp
qed

lemma compl_le_swap2:
  assumes "- y ≤ x"
  shows "- x ≤ y"
proof -
  from assms have "- x ≤ - (- y)" by (simp only: compl_le_compl_iff)
  then show ?thesis by simp
qed

lemma compl_less_compl_iff [simp]: "- x < - y ⟷ y < x"
  by (auto simp add: less_le)

lemma compl_less_swap1:
  assumes "y < - x"
  shows "x < - y"
proof -
  from assms have "- (- x) < - y" by (simp only: compl_less_compl_iff)
  then show ?thesis by simp
qed

lemma compl_less_swap2:
  assumes "- y < x"
  shows "- x < y"
proof -
  from assms have "- x < - (- y)"
    by (simp only: compl_less_compl_iff)
  then show ?thesis by simp
qed

lemma sup_cancel_left1: ‹x ⊔ a ⊔ (- x ⊔ b) = ⊤›
  by (simp add: ac_simps)

lemma sup_cancel_left2: ‹- x ⊔ a ⊔ (x ⊔ b) = ⊤›
  by (simp add: ac_simps)

lemma inf_cancel_left1: ‹x ⊓ a ⊓ (- x ⊓ b) = ⊥›
  by (simp add: ac_simps)

lemma inf_cancel_left2: ‹- x ⊓ a ⊓ (x ⊓ b) = ⊥›
  by (simp add: ac_simps)

lemma sup_compl_top_left1 [simp]: ‹- x ⊔ (x ⊔ y) = ⊤›
  by (simp add: sup_assoc [symmetric])

lemma sup_compl_top_left2 [simp]: ‹x ⊔ (- x ⊔ y) = ⊤›
  using sup_compl_top_left1 [of "- x" y] by simp

lemma inf_compl_bot_left1 [simp]: ‹- x ⊓ (x ⊓ y) = ⊥›
  by (simp add: inf_assoc [symmetric])

lemma inf_compl_bot_left2 [simp]: ‹x ⊓ (- x ⊓ y) = ⊥›
  using inf_compl_bot_left1 [of "- x" y] by simp

lemma inf_compl_bot_right [simp]: ‹x ⊓ (y ⊓ - x) = ⊥›
  by (subst inf_left_commute) simp

end


subsection ‹Lattice on \<^typ>‹bool››

instantiation bool :: boolean_algebra
begin

definition bool_Compl_def [simp]: "uminus = Not"

definition bool_diff_def [simp]: "A - B ⟷ A ∧ ¬ B"

definition [simp]: "P ⊓ Q ⟷ P ∧ Q"

definition [simp]: "P ⊔ Q ⟷ P ∨ Q"

instance by standard auto

end

lemma sup_boolI1: "P ⟹ P ⊔ Q"
  by simp

lemma sup_boolI2: "Q ⟹ P ⊔ Q"
  by simp

lemma sup_boolE: "P ⊔ Q ⟹ (P ⟹ R) ⟹ (Q ⟹ R) ⟹ R"
  by auto

instance "fun" :: (type, boolean_algebra) boolean_algebra
  by standard (rule ext, simp_all add: inf_compl_bot sup_compl_top diff_eq)+


subsection ‹Lattice on unary and binary predicates›

lemma inf1I: "A x ⟹ B x ⟹ (A ⊓ B) x"
  by (simp add: inf_fun_def)

lemma inf2I: "A x y ⟹ B x y ⟹ (A ⊓ B) x y"
  by (simp add: inf_fun_def)

lemma inf1E: "(A ⊓ B) x ⟹ (A x ⟹ B x ⟹ P) ⟹ P"
  by (simp add: inf_fun_def)

lemma inf2E: "(A ⊓ B) x y ⟹ (A x y ⟹ B x y ⟹ P) ⟹ P"
  by (simp add: inf_fun_def)

lemma inf1D1: "(A ⊓ B) x ⟹ A x"
  by (rule inf1E)

lemma inf2D1: "(A ⊓ B) x y ⟹ A x y"
  by (rule inf2E)

lemma inf1D2: "(A ⊓ B) x ⟹ B x"
  by (rule inf1E)

lemma inf2D2: "(A ⊓ B) x y ⟹ B x y"
  by (rule inf2E)

lemma sup1I1: "A x ⟹ (A ⊔ B) x"
  by (simp add: sup_fun_def)

lemma sup2I1: "A x y ⟹ (A ⊔ B) x y"
  by (simp add: sup_fun_def)

lemma sup1I2: "B x ⟹ (A ⊔ B) x"
  by (simp add: sup_fun_def)

lemma sup2I2: "B x y ⟹ (A ⊔ B) x y"
  by (simp add: sup_fun_def)

lemma sup1E: "(A ⊔ B) x ⟹ (A x ⟹ P) ⟹ (B x ⟹ P) ⟹ P"
  by (simp add: sup_fun_def) iprover

lemma sup2E: "(A ⊔ B) x y ⟹ (A x y ⟹ P) ⟹ (B x y ⟹ P) ⟹ P"
  by (simp add: sup_fun_def) iprover

text ‹ ┉ Classical introduction rule: no commitment to ‹A› vs ‹B›.›

lemma sup1CI: "(¬ B x ⟹ A x) ⟹ (A ⊔ B) x"
  by (auto simp add: sup_fun_def)

lemma sup2CI: "(¬ B x y ⟹ A x y) ⟹ (A ⊔ B) x y"
  by (auto simp add: sup_fun_def)


subsection ‹Simproc setup›

locale boolean_algebra_cancel
begin

lemma sup1: "(A::'a::semilattice_sup) ≡ sup k a ⟹ sup A b ≡ sup k (sup a b)"
  by (simp only: ac_simps)

lemma sup2: "(B::'a::semilattice_sup) ≡ sup k b ⟹ sup a B ≡ sup k (sup a b)"
  by (simp only: ac_simps)

lemma sup0: "(a::'a::bounded_semilattice_sup_bot) ≡ sup a bot"
  by simp

lemma inf1: "(A::'a::semilattice_inf) ≡ inf k a ⟹ inf A b ≡ inf k (inf a b)"
  by (simp only: ac_simps)

lemma inf2: "(B::'a::semilattice_inf) ≡ inf k b ⟹ inf a B ≡ inf k (inf a b)"
  by (simp only: ac_simps)

lemma inf0: "(a::'a::bounded_semilattice_inf_top) ≡ inf a top"
  by simp

end

ML_file ‹Tools/boolean_algebra_cancel.ML›

simproc_setup boolean_algebra_cancel_sup ("sup a b::'a::boolean_algebra") =
  ‹K (K (try Boolean_Algebra_Cancel.cancel_sup_conv))›

simproc_setup boolean_algebra_cancel_inf ("inf a b::'a::boolean_algebra") =
  ‹K (K (try Boolean_Algebra_Cancel.cancel_inf_conv))›


context boolean_algebra
begin
    
lemma shunt1: "(x ⊓ y ≤ z) ⟷ (x ≤ -y ⊔ z)"
proof
  assume "x ⊓ y ≤ z"
  hence  "-y ⊔ (x ⊓ y) ≤ -y ⊔ z"
    using sup.mono by blast
  hence "-y ⊔ x ≤ -y ⊔ z"
    by (simp add: sup_inf_distrib1)
  thus "x ≤ -y ⊔ z"
    by simp
next
  assume "x ≤ -y ⊔ z"
  hence "x ⊓ y ≤ (-y ⊔ z) ⊓ y"
    using inf_mono by auto
  thus  "x ⊓ y ≤ z"
    using inf.boundedE inf_sup_distrib2 by auto
qed

lemma shunt2: "(x ⊓ -y ≤ z) ⟷ (x ≤ y ⊔ z)"
  by (simp add: shunt1)

lemma inf_shunt: "(x ⊓ y = ⊥) ⟷ (x ≤ - y)"
  by (simp add: order.eq_iff shunt1)
  
lemma sup_shunt: "(x ⊔ y = ⊤) ⟷ (- x ≤ y)"
  using inf_shunt [of ‹- x› ‹- y›, symmetric] 
  by (simp flip: compl_sup compl_top_eq)

lemma diff_shunt_var: "(x - y = ⊥) ⟷ (x ≤ y)"
  by (simp add: diff_eq inf_shunt)

lemma sup_neg_inf:
  ‹p ≤ q ⊔ r ⟷ p ⊓ -q ≤ r›  (is ‹?P ⟷ ?Q›)
proof
  assume ?P
  then have ‹p ⊓ - q ≤ (q ⊔ r) ⊓ - q›
    by (rule inf_mono) simp
  then show ?Q
    by (simp add: inf_sup_distrib2)
next
  assume ?Q
  then have ‹p ⊓ - q ⊔ q ≤ r ⊔ q›
    by (rule sup_mono) simp
  then show ?P
    by (simp add: sup_inf_distrib ac_simps)
qed

end

end