Partial scans and terminal forest graphs #
Lemma 34 of [KKR18], arXiv:1602.03124v6, printed pp. 15–16, including a scan before saturation and the graph obtained by pruning every outgoing arc of the terminal copy. Certificates below are derived from the executable scan and run. They impose no even-delta-matroid assumption: incidence uniqueness, the old scans' saturation, and validity of the reference labeling suffice.
Main results #
scan_isFDAG: any partial feasible-partner scan preserves all six f-DAG conditions.search_terminal_isFDAG: both the actual partial forest and its terminal pruned graph are f-DAGs, including the isolated children retained in the variable support.
With unique discovery variables, every outgoing port identifies its actual parent. The original constraint position, rather than the timestamp, is tested in step 4b.
A fresh port cannot be a feasible partner of an older incoming port. Saturation of the older scan, including step-4b skips, is the essential reason.
Local facts about the current expansion before its scan is complete. In contrast to
Grown, no saturation condition on the current copy is asserted.
- grown : Grown sem f rs es
Older scans really completed.
- visited : Log.Visited rs es e.input.var
Step 2 chose a visited variable.
Step 2 chose an unused incidence.
- fresh (o : F.Occurrence) : o ∈ e.outputs → ¬Log.Visited rs es o.var
Every inserted child is a new variable.
- distinct : (List.map Occurrence.var e.outputs).Nodup
No child was inserted twice.
Every inserted child passed the actual partner test.
Instances For
The new ports of a partial expansion are all unused in the older log.
Partial scans preserve uniqueness of used positional incidences.
Partial scans preserve unique discovery variables.
Every partial scan satisfies all six f-DAG conditions. The current copy need not yet be saturated, and the local relations need not be even delta-matroids.
Lemma 34 during an actual scan, including every scanned prefix of the candidate list. The scan may have continued or stopped at its first meeting.
Exact stopping conditions at the first meeting of an actual scan.
Local execution evidence for a terminal record. No graph invariant or event-correctness conclusion is a field; these facts follow from the actual partner scan.
The initial nodes are exactly the inconsistent roots.
Local insertion and frontier conditions of the partial expansion.
The meeting port passed the feasible-pair test.
The meeting variable is visited at scan termination.
Source step 4b did not apply.
Instances For
A terminal partner cannot be a child just inserted at the current copy: its predecessor would have this original constraint position, triggering source step 4b.
The second incoming port is fresh even if its variable was visited long ago. Old outgoing ports trigger step 4b; old incoming ports contradict saturation and current-input freshness.
After pruning, exactly the two incoming arcs remain at the terminal copy. All older arcs survive, and the supported variables include the pruned, now isolated children.
The terminal graph of Lemma 34's moreover clause is an f-DAG. This proves the claim for the executable pruning operation, including its retained isolated child support.
Execution derives terminal scan evidence, independently of graph and event correctness.
Every terminal event in a fresh run has evidence obtained from its real scans.
Lemma 34 for both terminal graphs actually returned by a fresh search. No event or forest-correctness premise and no even-delta-matroid hypothesis is required.