This commit is contained in:
2026-06-10 19:02:33 +01:00
parent 2ec27ae5d6
commit 2043467149
+28 -16
View File
@@ -385,22 +385,9 @@ Pouya Partow\inst{1}\orcidID{0009-0003-9652-9469}}
\end{abstract} \end{abstract}
% %
% %
%
\section{Coalgebraic Simulation} \section{Coalgebraic Bisimulation}%\label{sec:}
We show the category of preorders with monotone functions between them with $\preord$. In the diagrams, any arrow that shows a functor, but does not have a label is showing a forgetful functor. Also, we use $\rel$ to refer to the category of binary relations. Assuming $R\in\obj(\rel)$ and $R\subseteq X_1\times X_2$, and $S\in\obj(\rel)$ and $S\subseteq Y_1\times Y_2$, then a morphism $f\c R\to S$ in this category is the pair $(f_1,f_2)$ of morhpisms in $\Set$, where, $f_1\c X_1\to Y_1$ and $f_2\c X_2\to Y_2$, and for each $(x_1,x_2)\in R$ we have $(f_1(x_1),f_2(x_2))\in S$. Also, we show projections of $R\in\obj(\rel)$ with $p_1$ and $p_2$ that are morphisms in $\Set$.
\begin{definition}[A Preorder Over a Functor]
Assuming $F\c\Set\to\Set$ is a functor, we call $\appr\c\Set\to\preord$ an order over the functor $F$ iff the following diagram commutes:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{tikzcd}[ampersand replacement=\&]
\& \preord \\
\Set \& \Set
\arrow[from=1-2, to=2-2]
\arrow["\appr", from=2-1, to=1-2]
\arrow["F"', from=2-1, to=2-2]
\end{tikzcd}
\end{equation*}
\end{definition}
%
\begin{definition}[Relation Lifting] \begin{definition}[Relation Lifting]
Assuming $F\c\Set\to\Set$ is a functor, then we call $\rel(F)\c\rel\to\rel$ a relation lifting of $F$, where the following diagram commutes: Assuming $F\c\Set\to\Set$ is a functor, then we call $\rel(F)\c\rel\to\rel$ a relation lifting of $F$, where the following diagram commutes:
\begin{equation*} \begin{equation*}
@@ -436,6 +423,29 @@ We take $\rel(F)\c\rel\to\rel$ to be the functor that for an arbitrary functor $
\end{tikzcd} \end{tikzcd}
\end{equation*} \end{equation*}
\end{prop} \end{prop}
\todo{Discuss 4 versions of bisimulation (with witness/without witness, for relations/for spans). Which are equivalent? Which do not make sense?}
\todo{In next section run a similar analysis for simulation: relator-based vs. Aczel-Mendler.}
%
\section{Coalgebraic Simulation}
We show the category of preorders with monotone functions between them with $\preord$. In the diagrams, any arrow that shows a functor, but does not have a label is showing a forgetful functor. Also, we use $\rel$ to refer to the category of binary relations. Assuming $R\in\obj(\rel)$ and $R\subseteq X_1\times X_2$, and $S\in\obj(\rel)$ and $S\subseteq Y_1\times Y_2$, then a morphism $f\c R\to S$ in this category is the pair $(f_1,f_2)$ of morhpisms in $\Set$, where, $f_1\c X_1\to Y_1$ and $f_2\c X_2\to Y_2$, and for each $(x_1,x_2)\in R$ we have $(f_1(x_1),f_2(x_2))\in S$. Also, we show projections of $R\in\obj(\rel)$ with $p_1$ and $p_2$ that are morphisms in $\Set$.
\begin{definition}[A Preorder Over a Functor]
Assuming $F\c\Set\to\Set$ is a functor, we call $\appr\c\Set\to\preord$ an order over the functor $F$ iff the following diagram commutes:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{tikzcd}[ampersand replacement=\&]
\& \preord \\
\Set \& \Set
\arrow[from=1-2, to=2-2]
\arrow["\appr", from=2-1, to=1-2]
\arrow["F"', from=2-1, to=2-2]
\end{tikzcd}
\end{equation*}
\end{definition}
%
We gave an introduction to Hughes and Jacobs paper. They also have a way to represent simulation relations. In the following, we try to find a suitable formalization for simulation relations, inspired by Hughes and Jacobs. We gave an introduction to Hughes and Jacobs paper. They also have a way to represent simulation relations. In the following, we try to find a suitable formalization for simulation relations, inspired by Hughes and Jacobs.
\subsection{Relations as \cancel{Pullbacks} Spans(?)} \subsection{Relations as \cancel{Pullbacks} Spans(?)}
We can not show every relation by pullbacks, but we can just show relations of the form We can not show every relation by pullbacks, but we can just show relations of the form
@@ -1036,6 +1046,7 @@ We show this relation with $F_\rel(R,X)$.
\end{tikzcd} \end{tikzcd}
\end{equation} \end{equation}
\end{definition} \end{definition}
\todo{Prove that simulation in this sense of this definition is a standard simulation for powerset.}
\begin{definition}[Bisimulation]\label{def:bisim} \begin{definition}[Bisimulation]\label{def:bisim}
The morphism $\sigma$ in~\autoref{def:sim} is a bisimulation iff the mentioned diagram is fully commutative. The morphism $\sigma$ in~\autoref{def:sim} is a bisimulation iff the mentioned diagram is fully commutative.
\end{definition} \end{definition}
@@ -1626,6 +1637,7 @@ Then we have
\end{tikzcd} \end{tikzcd}
\end{equation*} \end{equation*}
We recall that in the above diagram $\sigma_3$ is a bisimulation, and the rest are simulations. We recall that in the above diagram $\sigma_3$ is a bisimulation, and the rest are simulations.
\todo{So, $\sigma_3$ is a unique witness of bisimulation. How can we characterize it among all witnesses of simulation.}
\begin{definition}\label{def:join-meet} \begin{definition}\label{def:join-meet}
We define $\join$ and $\meet$ on morphisms as follows: We define $\join$ and $\meet$ on morphisms as follows:
\begin{gather*} \begin{gather*}