Re: [moca] confused by Sangiogi & Walker's ``up to'' lemmas

[Damien Pous <Damien.Pous@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, 07 Dec 2004 14:40:18 +0100
James Leifer <James.Leifer@xxxxxxxx> wrote:

> My problem: I don't see the use of the monotonicity with respect to
> subseteq.  In particular, Lemma 2.3.8,

I think you are true. The explanation can be found in remarks 2.7 and
2.12 of [1] : while the result holds without monotonicity
w.r.t. subseteq, this hypothesis allows one to close respectful
functions under (faithful) contexts : lemma 2.17.

[1] On the bisimulation proof method,
D. Sangiorgi, MSCS, 8, 1998. 
A summary in Proc. MFCS'95, LNCS 696.
<http://www.cs.unibo.it/~sangio/DOC_public/bis-proof.ps.gz>

Hope this helps,
Damien Pous
  
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The "models for mobility" mailing list     mailto:moca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 http://www-sop.inria.fr/mimosa/personnel/Davide.Sangiorgi/moca.html