[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
RE: [PVS-Help] R_pred
Not enough info -- it is equivalent to
[-1] W >= 0
[-2] P(W)
[-3] d >= 0
[-4] P(d)
|-------
[1] P(d + W)
Knowing that a proposition is true at W and d is not
sufficient to prove it true at d+W
Rick
-----Original Message-----
From: pvs-help-bounces+r.w.butler=larc.nasa.gov@xxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:pvs-help-bounces+r.w.butler=larc.nasa.gov@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Jerome
Sent: Thursday, November 06, 2008 6:34 PM
To: PVS Help
Subject: [PVS-Help] R_pred
I have the following:
[-1] W(root, j!1) >= 0
[-2] R_pred(W(root, j!1))
[-3] distance(s!1)(root) >= 0
[-4] R_pred(distance(s!1)(root))
|-------
[1] R_pred(distance(s!1)(root) + W(root, j!1))
Why is "assert" not an adequate means of discharging? What am I missing?
Thanks
jerome