Require Import ISL.Environments ISL.Sequents ISL.SequentProps ISL.Cut ISL.DecisionProcedure.
Require Import Program Equality.

Definition Lindenbaum_Tarski_preorder φ ψ :=
  ∅ • φ ⊢ ψ.

Declare Scope provability.
Open Scope provability.

Notation "φ ≼ ψ" := (Lindenbaum_Tarski_preorder φ ψ) (at level 150) : provability.

Corollary weak_cut φ ψ θ:
  (φ ≼ ψ) -> (ψ ≼ θ) ->
  φ ≼ θ.
Proof.
intros H1 H2.
eapply additive_cut.
- apply H1.
- exch 0. now apply weakening.
Qed.

Lemma top_provable Γ :
 Γ ⊢ ⊤.
Proof.
  apply ImpR. apply ExFalso.
Qed.

Global Hint Resolve top_provable : proof.

(* decides whether one formula entails the other or not ; in the latter case return Eq *)
Definition obviously_smaller (φ : form) (ψ : form) :=
  if [φ] ⊢? ψ then Lt
  else if [ψ] ⊢? φ then Gt
  else Eq.

Definition choose_conj φ ψ :=
match obviously_smaller φ ψ with
  | Lt => φ
  | Gt => ψ
  | Eq => φ ∧ ψ
 end.


Lemma occurs_in_choose_conj v φ ψ : occurs_in v (choose_conj φ ψ) -> occurs_in v φ \/ occurs_in v ψ.
Proof. unfold choose_conj; destruct obviously_smaller; simpl; intros; tauto. Qed.

Definition make_conj φ ψ :=
match ψ with
  | ψ1 ∧ ψ2 =>
      match obviously_smaller φ ψ1 with
      | Lt => φ ∧ ψ2
      | Gt => ψ1 ∧ ψ2
      | Eq => φ ∧ (ψ1 ∧ ψ2)
      end
  | ψ1 → ψ2 =>
      if decide (obviously_smaller φ ψ1 = Lt) then choose_conj φ ψ2
      else choose_conj φ ψ
  | ψ => match φ with
      | φ1 → φ2 =>
          if decide (obviously_smaller ψ φ1 = Lt)
          then choose_conj φ2 ψ
          else choose_conj φ ψ
      | _ => choose_conj φ ψ
       end
end.

Infix "⊼" := make_conj (at level 60).

Lemma occurs_in_make_conj v φ ψ : occurs_in v (φ ⊼ ψ) -> occurs_in v φ \/ occurs_in v ψ.
Proof.
generalize ψ.
induction φ; intro ψ0; destruct ψ0;
intro H; unfold make_conj in H; unfold choose_conj in H;
repeat match goal with
    | H: occurs_in _ (choose_conj _ _) |- _ => apply occurs_in_choose_conj in H; destruct H as [H|H]; simpl in H; try tauto
    | H: occurs_in _ (if ?cond then _ else _) |- _ => case decide in H; simpl in H; try tauto
    | H: occurs_in _ (match ?x with _ => _ end) |- _ => destruct x; simpl in H; try tauto
    | |- _ => simpl; simpl in H; tauto
end.
Qed. (* TODO: long *)

Definition choose_disj φ ψ :=
match obviously_smaller φ ψ with
  | Lt => ψ
  | Gt => φ
  | Eq => φ ∨ ψ
 end.

Definition make_disj φ ψ :=
match ψ with
  | ψ1 ∨ ψ2 =>
      match obviously_smaller φ ψ1 with
      | Lt => ψ1 ∨ ψ2
      | Gt => φ ∨ ψ2
      | Eq => φ ∨ (ψ1 ∨ ψ2)
      end
  | ψ1 ∧ ψ2 =>
      if decide (obviously_smaller φ ψ1 = Gt ) then φ
      else if decide (obviously_smaller φ ψ2 = Gt ) then φ
      else choose_disj φ (ψ1 ∧ ψ2)
  |_ => choose_disj φ ψ
end.

Infix "⊻" := make_disj (at level 65).

Lemma occurs_in_make_disj v φ ψ : occurs_in v (φ ⊻ ψ) -> occurs_in v φ ∨ occurs_in v ψ.
Proof.
generalize ψ.
induction φ; intro ψ0; destruct ψ0;
intro H; unfold make_disj in H; unfold choose_disj in H;
repeat match goal with
    | H: occurs_in _ (if ?cond then _ else _) |- _ => case decide in H
    | H: occurs_in _ (match ?x with _ => _ end) |- _ => destruct x
    | |- _ => simpl; simpl in H; tauto
end.
Qed.

(* "lazy" implication, which produces a potentially simpler, equivalent formula *)

(* Same as `simp_ors` but for nested implications. *)
Definition choose_impl φ ψ:=
     if decide (obviously_smaller φ ψ = Lt) then ⊤
     else if decide (obviously_smaller φ ⊥ = Lt) then ⊤
     else if decide (obviously_smaller ψ ⊤ = Gt) then ⊤
     else if decide (obviously_smaller φ ⊤ = Gt) then ψ
     else if decide (obviously_smaller ψ ⊥ = Lt) then ¬φ
     else if decide (is_negation φ ψ) then ¬φ
     else if decide (is_negation ψ φ) then ψ
    else φ → ψ.

Fixpoint make_impl φ ψ :=
match ψ with
  |(ψ1 → ψ2) => make_impl (make_conj φ ψ1) ψ2
  |_ => choose_impl φ ψ
end.

Infix "⇢" := make_impl (at level 66).

Lemma occurs_in_choose_impl v x y : occurs_in v (choose_impl x y) -> occurs_in v x ∨ occurs_in v y.
Proof.
intro H; unfold choose_impl in H; fold make_impl in H;
repeat match goal with
    | H: occurs_in _ (if ?cond then _ else _) |- _ => case decide in H
    | H: occurs_in _ (match ?x with _ => _ end) |- _ => destruct x
    | |- _ => simpl; simpl in H; tauto
end.
Qed.

Lemma occurs_in_make_impl v x y : occurs_in v (x ⇢ y) -> occurs_in v x ∨ occurs_in v y.
Proof.
generalize x.
induction y; intro ψ0;
intro H; unfold make_impl in H; try apply occurs_in_choose_impl in H; try tauto.
apply IHy2 in H. destruct H as [H|H]; [ apply occurs_in_make_conj in H|]; simpl; tauto.
Qed.

Lemma occurs_in_make_impl2 v x y z: occurs_in v (x ⇢ (y ⇢ z)) -> occurs_in v x ∨ occurs_in v y ∨ occurs_in v z.
Proof.
intro H. apply occurs_in_make_impl in H. destruct H as [H|H]; try tauto.
apply occurs_in_make_impl in H. tauto.
Qed.

Definition conjunction l := foldl make_conj (⊥→ ⊥) (nodup form_eq_dec l).
Notation "⋀" := conjunction.

Definition disjunction l := foldl make_disj ⊥ (nodup form_eq_dec l).
Notation "⋁" := disjunction.

Lemma variables_conjunction x l : occurs_in x (⋀ l) -> exists φ, φ ∈ l /\ occurs_in x φ.
Proof.
unfold conjunction.
assert (Hcut : forall ψ, occurs_in x (foldl make_conj ψ (nodup form_eq_dec l))
  -> occurs_in x ψ \/ (∃ φ : form, (φ ∈ l ∧ occurs_in x φ)%type)).
{
induction l; simpl.
- tauto.
- intros ψ Hocc.
  case in_dec in Hocc; apply IHl in Hocc; simpl in Hocc;
  destruct Hocc as [Hx|(φ&Hin&Hx)]; try tauto.
  + right. exists φ. split; auto with *.
  + apply occurs_in_make_conj in Hx; destruct Hx as [Hx|Hx]; auto with *.
      right. exists a. auto with *.
  + right. exists φ. split; auto with *.
}
intro Hocc. apply Hcut in Hocc. simpl in Hocc. tauto.
Qed.

Lemma variables_disjunction x l : occurs_in x (⋁ l) -> exists φ, φ ∈ l /\ occurs_in x φ.
Proof.
unfold disjunction.
assert (Hcut : forall ψ, occurs_in x (foldl make_disj ψ (nodup form_eq_dec l))
  -> occurs_in x ψ \/ (∃ φ : form, (φ ∈ l ∧ occurs_in x φ)%type)).
{
induction l; simpl.
- tauto.
- intros ψ Hocc.
  case in_dec in Hocc; apply IHl in Hocc; simpl in Hocc;
  destruct Hocc as [Hx|(φ&Hin&Hx)]; try tauto.
  + right. exists φ. split; auto with *.
  + apply occurs_in_make_disj in Hx; destruct Hx as [Hx|Hx]; auto with *.
      right. exists a. auto with *.
  + right. exists φ. split; auto with *.
}
intro Hocc. apply Hcut in Hocc. simpl in Hocc. tauto.
Qed.

(* Some tactics for the obviously_smaller proofs. *)

(* Solve goals involving the equality decision at the end of the match *)
Ltac eq_clean := match goal with
| H : (if decide (?f1 = ?f2) then ?t else Eq) = ?t |- _ =>
    case decide in H;
    match goal with
    | e : ?f1 = ?f2 |- _ => rewrite e; apply generalised_axiom
    | _ => discriminate
    end
| H : (if decide (?f1 = ?f2) then Lt else Eq) = Gt |- _ =>
    case decide in H; discriminate
| H : match ?φ with _ => _ end = _ |- _ => destruct φ; try discriminate; eq_clean
end.

(* Solve goals that involve directly using ExFalso *)
Ltac bot_clean := match goal with
| [ |- Bot ≼ _] => apply ExFalso
| [ |- _ ≼ Bot → _ ] => apply ImpR; apply ExFalso
| _ => idtac
end.

(* Solve induction goals *)
Ltac induction_auto := match goal with
| IH : obviously_smaller ?f ?f2 = Lt → ?f ≼ ?f2 , H : obviously_smaller ?f ?f2 = Lt |- (∅ • ?f) ⊢ ?f2 =>
    apply IH; assumption
| IH : obviously_smaller ?f ?f2 = Gt → ?f2 ≼ ?f , H : obviously_smaller ?f ?f2 = Gt |- (∅ • ?f2) ⊢ ?f =>
    apply IH; assumption

| IH : obviously_smaller ?f _ = Lt → ?f ≼ _ , H : obviously_smaller ?f _ = Lt |- ?f ∧ _ ≼ _ =>
    apply AndL; apply weakening; apply IH; assumption
| IH : obviously_smaller ?f _ = Lt → ?f ≼ _ , H : obviously_smaller ?f _ = Lt |- _ ∧ ?f ≼ _ =>
    apply AndL; exch 0; apply weakening; apply IH; assumption

| IH : obviously_smaller ?f _ = Gt → _ ≼ ?f , H : obviously_smaller ?f _ = Gt |- _ ≼ ?f ∨ _ =>
    apply OrR1; apply IH; assumption
| IH : obviously_smaller ?f _ = Gt → _ ≼ ?f , H : obviously_smaller ?f _ = Gt |- _ ≼ _ ∨ ?f =>
    apply OrR2; apply IH; assumption
| _ => idtac
end.

Lemma double_negation_obviously_smaller φ ψ:
 is_double_negation φ ψ -> ψ ≼ φ.
Proof.
intro H; rewrite H. apply ImpR; auto with proof.
Qed.

Lemma is_implication_obviously_smaller φ ψ:
 is_implication φ ψ -> ψ ≼ φ.
Proof.
unfold is_implication. intro H.
destruct φ; try (contradict H; intros [θ Hθ]; discriminate).
case (decide (φ2 = ψ)).
- intro; subst. apply ImpR, weakening, generalised_axiom.
- intro Hneq. contradict H; intros [θ Hθ]. inversion Hθ. tauto.
Qed.

Lemma obviously_smaller_compatible_LT φ ψ :
  obviously_smaller φ ψ = Lt -> φ ≼ ψ.
Proof.
unfold obviously_smaller, Lindenbaum_Tarski_preorder.
case ([φ] ⊢? ψ); intros Hp Hf.
- apply Provable_dec_of_Prop in Hp. peapply Hp.
- contradict Hf. case ([ψ] ⊢? φ); discriminate.
Qed.

Lemma obviously_smaller_compatible_GT φ ψ :
  obviously_smaller φ ψ = Gt -> ψ ≼ φ .
Proof.
unfold obviously_smaller, Lindenbaum_Tarski_preorder.
case ([ψ] ⊢? φ).
- case ([φ] ⊢? ψ). discriminate.
  intros _ Hp _. apply Provable_dec_of_Prop in Hp. peapply Hp.
- case ([φ] ⊢? ψ); discriminate.
Qed.

Lemma and_congruence φ ψ φ' ψ':
  (φ ≼ φ') -> (ψ ≼ ψ') -> (φ ∧ ψ) ≼ φ' ∧ ψ'.
Proof.
intros Hφ Hψ.
apply AndL.
apply AndR.
- now apply weakening.
- exch 0. now apply weakening.
Qed.

Lemma choose_conj_equiv_L φ ψ φ' ψ':
  (φ ≼ φ') -> (ψ ≼ ψ') -> (φ ∧ ψ) ≼ choose_conj φ' ψ'.
Proof.
intros Hφ Hψ.
unfold choose_conj.
case_eq (obviously_smaller φ' ψ'); intro Heq.
- apply and_congruence; assumption.
- apply AndL, weakening, Hφ.
- apply AndL. exch 0. apply weakening, Hψ.
Qed.

Lemma choose_conj_equiv_R φ ψ φ' ψ':
  (φ' ≼ φ) -> (ψ' ≼ ψ) -> choose_conj φ' ψ' ≼ φ ∧ ψ.
Proof.
intros Hφ Hψ.
unfold choose_conj.
case_eq (obviously_smaller φ' ψ'); intro Heq.
- now apply and_congruence.
- apply AndR.
  + assumption.
  + eapply weak_cut.
    * apply obviously_smaller_compatible_LT, Heq.
    * assumption.
- apply AndR.
  + eapply weak_cut.
    * apply obviously_smaller_compatible_GT, Heq.
    * assumption.
  + assumption.
Qed.

Hint Unfold Lindenbaum_Tarski_preorder : proof.

Lemma make_conj_equiv_L φ ψ φ' ψ' :
  (φ ≼ φ') -> (ψ ≼ ψ') -> (φ ∧ ψ) ≼ φ' ⊼ ψ'.
Proof.
intros Hφ Hψ.
unfold make_conj.
destruct ψ'; try (apply choose_conj_equiv_L; assumption).
- destruct φ'; try (apply choose_conj_equiv_L; assumption).
  case decide; intro; try (apply choose_conj_equiv_L; assumption).
  apply obviously_smaller_compatible_LT in e.
  apply weak_cut with ((φ ∧ φ'1) ∧ ψ).
  + apply AndL; repeat apply AndR. auto with proof.
      * exch 0. apply weakening; apply weak_cut with v; assumption.
      * apply generalised_axiom.
  + apply choose_conj_equiv_L; auto with proof.
- apply exfalso, AndL. exch 0. apply weakening, Hψ.
- case_eq (obviously_smaller φ' ψ'1); intro Heq.
  + apply and_congruence; assumption.
  + apply and_congruence.
    * assumption.
    * apply AndR_rev in Hψ; apply Hψ.
  + apply AndL. exch 0. apply weakening. assumption.
- destruct φ'; try (apply choose_conj_equiv_L; assumption).
  case decide; intro; try (apply choose_conj_equiv_L; assumption).
  apply obviously_smaller_compatible_LT in e.
  apply weak_cut with ((φ ∧ φ'1) ∧ ψ).
  + apply AndL; repeat apply AndR. auto with proof.
      * exch 0. apply weakening; apply weak_cut with (ψ'1 ∨ ψ'2); assumption.
      * apply generalised_axiom.
  + apply choose_conj_equiv_L; auto with proof.
- case (decide (obviously_smaller φ' ψ'1 = Lt)); intro.
  + apply weak_cut with (φ ∧ (φ ∧ ψ)).
     * apply AndR; auto with proof.
     * apply choose_conj_equiv_L. assumption.
        apply obviously_smaller_compatible_LT in e.
        apply contraction, ImpR_rev. apply weak_cut with ψ'1.
        -- apply weak_cut with φ'; auto with proof.
        -- apply ImpR. exch 0. apply ImpR_rev, AndL. exch 0. apply weakening, Hψ.
  + apply choose_conj_equiv_L; assumption.
- destruct φ'; try (apply choose_conj_equiv_L; assumption).
  case decide; intro; try (apply choose_conj_equiv_L; assumption).
  apply weak_cut with (ψ ∧ (φ ∧ φ'1)).
  + apply AndL, AndR. auto with proof. apply AndR. auto with proof.
      exch 0. apply weakening. apply weak_cut with (□ ψ'). auto with proof.
      now apply obviously_smaller_compatible_LT.
  + apply weak_cut with ((φ ∧ φ'1) ∧ ψ).
     * apply AndR; auto with proof.
     * apply choose_conj_equiv_L; auto with proof.
Qed.

Lemma make_conj_equiv_R φ ψ φ' ψ' :
  (φ' ≼ φ) -> (ψ' ≼ ψ) -> φ' ⊼ ψ' ≼ φ ∧ ψ.
Proof.
intros Hφ Hψ.
unfold make_conj.
destruct ψ'.
- destruct φ'; try case decide; intros; apply choose_conj_equiv_R; try assumption.
  eapply imp_cut; eassumption.
- destruct φ'; try case decide; intros; apply choose_conj_equiv_R; try assumption.
   eapply imp_cut; eassumption.
- case_eq (obviously_smaller φ' ψ'1); intro Heq.
  + now apply and_congruence.
  + apply AndR.
    * apply AndL. now apply weakening.
    * apply (weak_cut _ ( ψ'1 ∧ ψ'2) _).
      -- apply and_congruence;
         [now apply obviously_smaller_compatible_LT | apply generalised_axiom].
      -- assumption.
  + apply AndR.
    * apply AndL. apply weakening. eapply weak_cut.
      -- apply obviously_smaller_compatible_GT; apply Heq.
      -- assumption.
    * assumption.
- destruct φ'; try case decide; intros; apply choose_conj_equiv_R; try assumption.
   eapply imp_cut; eassumption.
- case decide; intro Heq.
  + apply choose_conj_equiv_R. assumption. eapply weak_cut; [|exact Hψ]. auto with proof.
  + apply choose_conj_equiv_R; assumption.
- destruct φ'; try case decide; intros; apply choose_conj_equiv_R; try assumption.
  eapply imp_cut; eassumption.
Qed.

Lemma specialised_weakening Γ φ ψ : (φ ≼ ψ) -> Γ•φ ⊢ ψ.
Proof.
intro H.
apply generalised_weakeningL.
peapply H.
Qed.

Lemma make_conj_sound_L Γ φ ψ θ : Γ•φ ∧ψ ⊢ θ -> Γ• φ ⊼ ψ ⊢ θ.
Proof.
intro H.
eapply additive_cut.
- apply specialised_weakening.
  apply make_conj_equiv_R; apply generalised_axiom.
- exch 0. now apply weakening.
Qed.

Global Hint Resolve make_conj_sound_L : proof.

Lemma make_conj_complete_L Γ φ ψ θ : Γ• φ ⊼ ψ ⊢ θ -> Γ•φ ∧ψ ⊢ θ.
Proof.
intro H.
eapply additive_cut.
- apply specialised_weakening.
  apply make_conj_equiv_L; apply generalised_axiom.
- exch 0. now apply weakening.
Qed.

Lemma make_conj_sound_R Γ φ ψ : Γ ⊢ φ ∧ψ -> Γ ⊢ φ ⊼ ψ.
Proof.
intro H.
eapply additive_cut.
- apply H.
- apply make_conj_complete_L, generalised_axiom.
Qed.

Global Hint Resolve make_conj_sound_R : proof.

Lemma make_conj_complete_R Γ φ ψ : Γ ⊢ φ ⊼ ψ -> Γ ⊢ φ ∧ψ.
Proof.
intro H.
eapply additive_cut.
- apply H.
- apply make_conj_sound_L, generalised_axiom.
Qed.

Lemma or_congruence φ ψ φ' ψ':
  (φ ≼ φ') -> (ψ ≼ ψ') -> (φ ∨ ψ) ≼ φ' ∨ ψ'.
Proof.
intros Hφ Hψ.
apply OrL.
- now apply OrR1.
- now apply OrR2.
Qed.

Lemma choose_disj_equiv_L φ ψ φ' ψ':
  (φ ≼ φ') -> (ψ ≼ ψ') -> (φ ∨ ψ) ≼ choose_disj φ' ψ'.
Proof.
intros Hφ Hψ.
unfold choose_disj.
case_eq (obviously_smaller φ' ψ'); intro Heq.
- case_eq (obviously_smaller ψ' φ'); intro Heq'.
  + apply or_congruence; assumption.
  + auto with proof.
  + auto with proof.
- apply OrL.
  + eapply weak_cut.
    * apply Hφ.
    * apply obviously_smaller_compatible_LT; assumption.
  + assumption.
- apply OrL.
  + assumption.
  + eapply weak_cut.
    * eapply weak_cut.
      -- apply Hψ.
      -- apply obviously_smaller_compatible_GT. apply Heq.
    * apply generalised_axiom.
Qed.

Lemma choose_disj_equiv_R φ ψ φ' ψ' :
  (φ' ≼ φ) -> (ψ' ≼ ψ) -> choose_disj φ' ψ' ≼ φ ∨ ψ.
Proof.
intros Hφ Hψ.
unfold choose_disj.
case_eq (obviously_smaller φ' ψ'); intro Heq;
[| apply OrR2| apply OrR1]; try assumption.
auto with proof.
Qed.

Lemma make_disj_equiv_L φ ψ φ' ψ' :
  (φ ≼ φ') -> (ψ ≼ ψ') -> (φ ∨ ψ) ≼ φ' ⊻ ψ'.
Proof.
intros Hφ Hψ.
unfold make_disj.
destruct ψ'; try (apply choose_disj_equiv_L; assumption).
- repeat case decide; intros.
  + apply OrL.
    * assumption.
    * eapply weak_cut.
      -- apply Hψ.
      -- apply AndL; apply weakening; now apply obviously_smaller_compatible_GT.
  + apply OrL.
    * assumption.
    * eapply weak_cut.
      -- apply Hψ.
      -- apply AndL; exch 0. apply weakening; now apply obviously_smaller_compatible_GT.
  + now apply choose_disj_equiv_L.
- case_eq (obviously_smaller φ' ψ'1); intro Heq.
  + now apply or_congruence.
  + apply OrL.
    * eapply weak_cut.
      -- apply Hφ.
      -- apply OrR1. now apply obviously_smaller_compatible_LT.
    * assumption.
  + apply OrL.
    * now apply OrR1.
    * eapply weak_cut.
      -- apply Hψ.
      -- apply or_congruence; [apply obviously_smaller_compatible_GT; assumption| apply generalised_axiom].
Qed.

Lemma make_disj_equiv_R φ ψ φ' ψ' :
  (φ' ≼ φ) -> (ψ' ≼ ψ) -> φ' ⊻ ψ' ≼ φ ∨ ψ.
Proof.
intros Hφ Hψ.
unfold make_disj.
destruct ψ'.
- now apply choose_disj_equiv_R.
- now apply choose_disj_equiv_R.
- repeat case decide; intros.
  + now apply OrR1.
  + now apply OrR1.
  + now apply choose_disj_equiv_R.
- case_eq (obviously_smaller φ' ψ'1); intro Heq.
 + now apply or_congruence.
 + now apply OrR2.
 + apply OrL.
   * now apply OrR1.
   * apply OrL_rev in Hψ.
     apply OrR2, Hψ.
- now apply choose_disj_equiv_R.
- now apply choose_disj_equiv_R.
Qed.

Lemma make_disj_sound_L Γ φ ψ θ : Γ•φ ∨ψ ⊢ θ -> Γ•make_disj φ ψ ⊢ θ.
Proof.
intro H.
eapply additive_cut.
- apply specialised_weakening.
  apply make_disj_equiv_R; apply generalised_axiom.
- exch 0. now apply weakening.
Qed.

Global Hint Resolve make_disj_sound_L : proof.

Lemma make_disj_complete_L Γ φ ψ θ : Γ•make_disj φ ψ ⊢ θ -> Γ•φ ∨ψ ⊢ θ.
Proof.
intro H.
eapply additive_cut.
- apply specialised_weakening.
  apply make_disj_equiv_L; apply generalised_axiom.
- exch 0. now apply weakening.
Qed.

Lemma make_disj_sound_R Γ φ ψ : Γ ⊢ φ ∨ψ -> Γ ⊢ make_disj φ ψ.
Proof.
intro H.
eapply additive_cut.
- apply H.
- apply make_disj_complete_L, generalised_axiom.
Qed.

Global Hint Resolve make_disj_sound_R : proof.

Lemma make_disj_complete_R Γ φ ψ : Γ ⊢ make_disj φ ψ -> Γ ⊢ φ ∨ψ.
Proof.
intro H.
eapply additive_cut.
- apply H.
- apply make_disj_sound_L, generalised_axiom.
Qed.

Lemma disjunction_L Γ Δ θ :
  ((forall φ, φ ∈ Δ -> (Γ•φ ⊢ θ)) -> (Γ•⋁ Δ ⊢ θ)) *
  ((Γ•⋁ Δ ⊢ θ) -> (forall φ, φ ∈ Δ -> (Γ•φ ⊢ θ))).
Proof.
unfold disjunction.
assert(Hcut :
  (forall ψ, (Γ•ψ ⊢ θ) -> (forall φ, φ ∈ Δ -> (Γ•φ ⊢ θ)) ->
    (Γ•foldl make_disj ψ (nodup form_eq_dec Δ) ⊢ θ)) *
  (forall ψ,((Γ•foldl make_disj ψ (nodup form_eq_dec Δ)) ⊢ θ ->
    (Γ•ψ ⊢ θ) * (∀ φ : form, φ ∈ Δ → (Γ•φ) ⊢ θ)))).
{
  induction Δ; simpl; split; intros ψ Hψ.
  - intro. apply Hψ.
  - split; trivial. intros φ Hin. contradict Hin. auto with *.
  - intro Hall. case in_dec; intro; apply (fst IHΔ); auto with *.
  - case in_dec in Hψ; apply IHΔ in Hψ;
    destruct Hψ as [Hψ Hind].
    + split; trivial; intros φ Hin; destruct (decide (φ = a)); auto 2 with *.
        subst. apply Hind. now apply elem_of_list_In.
    + apply make_disj_complete_L in Hψ.
        apply OrL_rev in Hψ as [Hψ Ha].
        split; trivial; intros φ Hin; destruct (decide (φ = a)); auto with *.
}
split; apply Hcut. constructor 2.
Qed.

Lemma disjunction_R Γ Δ φ : (φ ∈ Δ) -> (Γ ⊢ φ) -> (Γ ⊢ ⋁ Δ).
Proof.
intros Hin Hprov. unfold disjunction. revert Hin.
assert(Hcut : forall θ, ((Γ ⊢ θ) + (φ ∈ Δ)) -> Γ ⊢ foldl make_disj θ (nodup form_eq_dec Δ)).
{
  induction Δ; simpl; intros θ [Hθ | Hin].
  - assumption.
  - contradict Hin; auto with *.
  - case in_dec; intro; apply IHΔ; left; trivial. apply make_disj_sound_R. now apply OrR1.
  - apply elem_of_cons in Hin.
    destruct (decide (φ = a)).
    + subst. case in_dec; intro; apply IHΔ.
        * right. now apply elem_of_list_In.
        * left. apply make_disj_sound_R. now apply OrR2.
    + case in_dec; intro; apply IHΔ; right; tauto.
}
intro Hin. apply Hcut; now right.
Qed.

Lemma conjunction_R1 Γ Δ : (forall φ, φ ∈ Δ -> Γ ⊢ φ) -> (Γ ⊢ ⋀ Δ).
Proof.
intro Hprov. unfold conjunction.
assert(Hcut : forall θ, Γ ⊢ θ -> Γ ⊢ foldl make_conj θ (nodup form_eq_dec Δ)).
{
  induction Δ; intros θ Hθ; simpl; trivial.
  case in_dec; intro; auto with *.
  apply IHΔ.
  - intros; apply Hprov. now right.
  - apply make_conj_sound_R, AndR; trivial. apply Hprov. now left.
}
apply Hcut. apply ImpR, ExFalso.
Qed.

Lemma conjunction_R2 Γ Δ : (Γ ⊢ ⋀ Δ) -> (forall φ, φ ∈ Δ -> Γ ⊢ φ).
Proof.
 unfold conjunction.
assert(Hcut : forall θ, Γ ⊢ foldl make_conj θ (nodup form_eq_dec Δ) -> (Γ ⊢ θ) * (forall φ, φ ∈ Δ -> Γ ⊢ φ)).
{
  induction Δ; simpl; intros θ Hθ.
  - split; trivial. intros φ Hin; contradict Hin. auto with *.
  - case in_dec in Hθ; destruct (IHΔ _ Hθ) as (Hθ' & Hi);
     try (apply make_conj_complete_R in Hθ'; destruct (AndR_rev Hθ')); split; trivial;
     intros φ Hin; apply elem_of_cons in Hin;
     destruct (decide (φ = a)); subst; trivial.
     + apply Hi. rewrite elem_of_list_In; tauto.
     + apply (IHΔ _ Hθ). tauto.
     + apply (IHΔ _ Hθ). tauto.
}
apply Hcut.
Qed.

Lemma conjunction_L Γ Δ φ θ: (φ ∈ Δ) -> (Γ•φ ⊢ θ) -> (Γ•⋀ Δ ⊢ θ).
Proof.
intros Hin Hprov. unfold conjunction. revert Hin.
assert(Hcut : forall ψ, ((φ ∈ Δ) + (Γ•ψ ⊢ θ)) -> (Γ•foldl make_conj ψ (nodup form_eq_dec Δ) ⊢ θ)).
{
  induction Δ; simpl; intros ψ [Hin | Hψ].
  - contradict Hin; auto with *.
  - trivial.
  - case in_dec; intro; apply IHΔ; destruct (decide (φ = a)).
    + subst. left. now apply elem_of_list_In.
    + left. auto with *.
    + subst. right. apply make_conj_sound_L. auto with proof.
    + left. auto with *.
  - case in_dec; intro; apply IHΔ; right; trivial.
     apply make_conj_sound_L. auto with proof.
}
intro Hin. apply Hcut. now left.
Qed.

(* TODO move up *)

(* TODO: suitable name *)
Lemma tautology_cut {Γ} {φ ψ θ : form} : Γ • (φ → ψ) ⊢ θ -> (φ ≼ ψ) -> Γ ⊢ θ.
Proof.
intros Hp H.
apply additive_cut with (φ → ψ).
  + apply ImpR, generalised_weakeningL. peapply H.
  + apply Hp.
Qed.

Lemma Lindenbaum_Tarski_preorder_Bot φ : ⊥ ≼ φ.
Proof. apply ExFalso. Qed.

Local Hint Resolve Lindenbaum_Tarski_preorder_Bot : proof.

Lemma choose_impl_sound_L Γ φ ψ θ: Γ•(φ → ψ) ⊢ θ -> Γ•(choose_impl φ ψ) ⊢ θ.
Proof.
intro HP.
unfold choose_impl; repeat case decide; intros;
repeat match goal with
| H : obviously_smaller _ _ = Lt |- _ => apply obviously_smaller_compatible_LT in H
| H : obviously_smaller _ _ = Gt |- _ => apply obviously_smaller_compatible_GT in H
| H : is_negation _ _ |- _ => eapply additive_cut; [| exch 0; apply weakening, HP]; apply ImpR, exfalso; exch 0; auto with proof
end; trivial; try (solve [eapply imp_cut; eauto]);
try solve[apply weakening, (tautology_cut HP); trivial; try apply weak_cut with ⊥; auto with proof].
- apply weakening, (tautology_cut HP); trivial. apply additive_cut with (φ := ⊤); auto with proof.
- eapply additive_cut with (φ := (φ → ψ)).
  + apply ImpR. exch 0. apply ImpL; auto with proof.
  + auto with proof.
- unfold is_negation in *. subst. auto with proof.
Qed.

Lemma make_impl_sound_L Γ φ ψ θ: Γ•(φ → ψ) ⊢ θ -> Γ•(φ ⇢ ψ) ⊢ θ.
Proof.
revert φ. induction ψ; intros φ HP; simpl; repeat case decide; intros.
1-4, 6: now apply choose_impl_sound_L.
apply IHψ2.
apply ImpLAnd in HP.
apply additive_cut with ((φ ∧ ψ1 → ψ2) → θ).
- apply weakening, ImpR, HP.
- apply ImpL; [|auto with proof].
  apply weakening, ImpR. exch 0. apply ImpL; [|auto with proof].
  apply weakening, make_conj_complete_L, generalised_axiom.
Qed.

Global Hint Resolve make_impl_sound_L : proof.

Lemma choose_impl_sound_R Γ φ ψ: Γ ⊢ (φ → ψ) -> Γ ⊢ choose_impl φ ψ.
Proof.
unfold choose_impl.
 repeat case decide; intros;
repeat match goal with
| |- _ ⊢ ⊤ => apply ImpR, ExFalso
| H : obviously_smaller _ _ = Lt |- _ => apply obviously_smaller_compatible_LT in H
| H : obviously_smaller _ _ = Gt |- _ => apply obviously_smaller_compatible_GT in H
| H : is_negation _ _ |- _ => rewrite H in *; apply ImpR; eapply additive_cut; [apply ImpR_rev, HP| exch 0; auto with *]
end; trivial; auto with proof;
try (solve[peapply (cut ∅ Γ φ); auto with proof; eapply TopL_rev; eauto]).
- apply ImpR, additive_cut with (φ:= ψ).
  + now apply ImpR_rev.
  + apply generalised_weakeningL. peapply e.
- unfold is_negation in *. subst. auto with proof.
- unfold is_negation in *. subst. auto with proof.
Qed.

Lemma make_impl_sound_R Γ φ ψ: Γ ⊢ (φ → ψ) -> Γ ⊢ φ ⇢ ψ.
Proof.
revert φ. induction ψ; intros φ HP; simpl.
1-4, 6: now apply choose_impl_sound_R.
apply IHψ2, ImpR, make_conj_sound_L, AndL, ImpR_rev, ImpR_rev, HP.
Qed.

Global Hint Resolve make_impl_sound_R : proof.

Lemma make_impl_sound_L2 Γ φ1 φ2 ψ θ: Γ•(φ1 → (φ2 → ψ)) ⊢ θ -> Γ•(φ1 ⇢ (φ2 ⇢ ψ)) ⊢ θ.
Proof.
intro HP. apply make_impl_sound_L in HP.
apply additive_cut with (φ1 ⇢ (φ2 → ψ)).
- apply make_impl_sound_L, make_impl_sound_R.
  apply ImpR. exch 0. apply ImpL.
  + apply weakening, generalised_axiom.
  + exch 0. apply weakening, make_impl_sound_L, generalised_axiom.
- exch 0. apply weakening, HP.
Qed.

Global Hint Resolve make_impl_sound_L2: proof.

Lemma make_impl_sound_L2' Γ φ1 φ2 ψ θ: Γ•((φ1 → φ2) → ψ) ⊢ θ -> Γ•((φ1 ⇢ φ2) ⇢ ψ) ⊢ θ.
Proof.
intro HP. apply make_impl_sound_L.
apply additive_cut with ((φ1 → φ2) → ψ); [|exch 0; apply weakening, HP].
apply ImpR. exch 0. apply ImpL.
- apply weakening, make_impl_sound_R, generalised_axiom.
- apply generalised_axiom.
Qed.

Lemma make_impl_complete_L Γ φ ψ θ: Γ•(φ ⇢ ψ) ⊢ θ -> Γ•(φ → ψ) ⊢ θ.
Proof.
intro HP.
apply additive_cut with (φ ⇢ ψ); [|exch 0; apply weakening, HP].
apply make_impl_sound_R, generalised_axiom.
Qed.

Lemma make_impl_complete_L2 Γ φ1 φ2 ψ θ: Γ•(φ1 ⇢ (φ2 ⇢ ψ)) ⊢ θ -> Γ•(φ1 → (φ2 → ψ)) ⊢ θ.
Proof.
intro HP. apply make_impl_complete_L in HP.
apply additive_cut with (φ1 → φ2 ⇢ ψ); [|exch 0; apply weakening, HP].
apply ImpR. exch 0. apply ImpL.
- apply weakening, generalised_axiom.
- exch 0. apply weakening, make_impl_sound_R, generalised_axiom.
Qed.

Lemma make_impl_complete_R Γ φ ψ: Γ ⊢ φ ⇢ ψ -> Γ ⊢ (φ → ψ).
Proof.
intro HP.
apply additive_cut with (φ ⇢ ψ); [apply HP| apply make_impl_sound_L, generalised_axiom ].
Qed.

Lemma OrR_idemp Γ ψ : Γ ⊢ ψ ∨ ψ -> Γ ⊢ ψ.
Proof. intro Hp. dependent induction Hp; auto with proof. Qed.

Lemma strongness φ : ∅ • φ ⊢ □ φ.
Proof.
apply BoxR. box_tac. apply weakening, open_box_L, generalised_axiom.
Qed.