P. 159 of Theorem List - Intuitionistic Logic Explorer

Theorem List for Intuitionistic Logic Explorer - 15801-15900   *Has distinct variable group(s)

Type	Label	Description
Statement
Theorem	bj-elssuniab 15801	Version of elssuni 3880 using a class abstraction and explicit substitution. (Contributed by BJ, 29-Nov-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑥𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ([𝐴 / 𝑥]𝜑 → 𝐴 ⊆ ∪ {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑}))
Theorem	bj-sseq 15802	If two converse inclusions are characterized each by a formula, then equality is characterized by the conjunction of these formulas. (Contributed by BJ, 30-Nov-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜓 ↔ 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝜒 ↔ 𝐵 ⊆ 𝐴))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝜓 ∧ 𝜒) ↔ 𝐴 = 𝐵))
14.2.5  Decidability of classes The question of decidability is essential in intuitionistic logic. In intuitionistic set theories, it is natural to define decidability of a set (or class) as decidability of membership in it. One can parameterize this notion with another set (or class) since it is often important to assess decidability of membership in one class among elements of another class. Namely, one will say that "𝐴 is decidable in 𝐵 " if ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐵DECID 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 (see df-dcin 15804). Note the similarity with the definition of a bounded class as a class for which membership in it is a bounded proposition (df-bdc 15851).
Syntax	wdcin 15803	Syntax for decidability of a class in another.
wff 𝐴 DECIDin 𝐵
Definition	df-dcin 15804*	Define decidability of a class in another. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Feb-2022.)
⊢ (𝐴 DECIDin 𝐵 ↔ ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 DECID 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)
Theorem	decidi 15805	Property of being decidable in another class. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Feb-2022.)
⊢ (𝐴 DECIDin 𝐵 → (𝑋 ∈ 𝐵 → (𝑋 ∈ 𝐴 ∨ ¬ 𝑋 ∈ 𝐴)))
Theorem	decidr 15806*	Sufficient condition for being decidable in another class. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Feb-2022.)
⊢ (𝜑 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐵 → (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∨ ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 DECIDin 𝐵)
Theorem	decidin 15807	If A is a decidable subclass of B (meaning: it is a subclass of B and it is decidable in B), and B is decidable in C, then A is decidable in C. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Feb-2022.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ⊆ 𝐵)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 DECIDin 𝐵)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐵 DECIDin 𝐶)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 DECIDin 𝐶)
Theorem	uzdcinzz 15808	An upperset of integers is decidable in the integers. Reformulation of eluzdc 9738. (Contributed by Jim Kingdon, 18-Apr-2020.) (Revised by BJ, 19-Feb-2022.)
⊢ (𝑀 ∈ ℤ → (ℤ≥‘𝑀) DECIDin ℤ)
Theorem	sumdc2 15809*	Alternate proof of sumdc 11713, without disjoint variable condition on 𝑁, 𝑥 (longer because the statement is taylored to the proof sumdc 11713). (Contributed by BJ, 19-Feb-2022.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑀 ∈ ℤ)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐴 ⊆ (ℤ≥‘𝑀))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥 ∈ (ℤ≥‘𝑀)DECID 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑁 ∈ ℤ)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → DECID 𝑁 ∈ 𝐴)
14.2.6  Disjoint union
Theorem	djucllem 15810*	Lemma for djulcl 7160 and djurcl 7161. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Jul-2022.)
⊢ 𝑋 ∈ V    &   ⊢ 𝐹 = (𝑥 ∈ V ↦ ⟨𝑋, 𝑥⟩)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝐵 → ((𝐹 ↾ 𝐵)‘𝐴) ∈ ({𝑋} × 𝐵))
Theorem	djulclALT 15811	Shortening of djulcl 7160 using djucllem 15810. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Jul-2022.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝐶 ∈ 𝐴 → ((inl ↾ 𝐴)‘𝐶) ∈ (𝐴 ⊔ 𝐵))
Theorem	djurclALT 15812	Shortening of djurcl 7161 using djucllem 15810. (Contributed by BJ, 4-Jul-2022.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝐶 ∈ 𝐵 → ((inr ↾ 𝐵)‘𝐶) ∈ (𝐴 ⊔ 𝐵))
14.2.7  Miscellaneous
Theorem	funmptd 15813	The maps-to notation defines a function (deduction form). Note: one should similarly prove a deduction form of funopab4 5313, then prove funmptd 15813 from it, and then prove funmpt 5314 from that: this would reduce global proof length. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Aug-2024.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹 = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → Fun 𝐹)
Theorem	fnmptd 15814*	The maps-to notation defines a function with domain (deduction form). (Contributed by BJ, 5-Aug-2024.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹 = (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↦ 𝐵))    &   ⊢ ((𝜑 ∧ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴) → 𝐵 ∈ 𝑉)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹 Fn 𝐴)
Theorem	if0ab 15815*	Expression of a conditional class as a class abstraction when the False alternative is the empty class: in that case, the conditional class is the extension, in the True alternative, of the condition. Remark: a consequence which could be formalized is the inclusion ⊢ if(𝜑, 𝐴, ∅) ⊆ 𝐴 and therefore, using elpwg 3625, ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → if(𝜑, 𝐴, ∅) ∈ 𝒫 𝐴), from which fmelpw1o 15816 could be derived, yielding an alternative proof. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Aug-2024.)
⊢ if(𝜑, 𝐴, ∅) = {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜑}
Theorem	fmelpw1o 15816	With a formula 𝜑 one can associate an element of 𝒫 1o, which can therefore be thought of as the set of "truth values" (but recall that there are no other genuine truth values than ⊤ and ⊥, by nndc 853, which translate to 1o and ∅ respectively by iftrue 3577 and iffalse 3580, giving pwtrufal 16008). As proved in if0ab 15815, the associated element of 𝒫 1o is the extension, in 𝒫 1o, of the formula 𝜑. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Aug-2024.)
⊢ if(𝜑, 1o, ∅) ∈ 𝒫 1o
Theorem	bj-charfun 15817*	Properties of the characteristic function on the class 𝑋 of the class 𝐴. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Aug-2024.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹 = (𝑥 ∈ 𝑋 ↦ if(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 1o, ∅)))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ((𝐹:𝑋⟶𝒫 1o ∧ (𝐹 ↾ ((𝑋 ∩ 𝐴) ∪ (𝑋 ∖ 𝐴))):((𝑋 ∩ 𝐴) ∪ (𝑋 ∖ 𝐴))⟶2o) ∧ (∀𝑥 ∈ (𝑋 ∩ 𝐴)(𝐹‘𝑥) = 1o ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ (𝑋 ∖ 𝐴)(𝐹‘𝑥) = ∅)))
Theorem	bj-charfundc 15818*	Properties of the characteristic function on the class 𝑋 of the class 𝐴, provided membership in 𝐴 is decidable in 𝑋. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Aug-2024.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹 = (𝑥 ∈ 𝑋 ↦ if(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 1o, ∅)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑋 DECID 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐹:𝑋⟶2o ∧ (∀𝑥 ∈ (𝑋 ∩ 𝐴)(𝐹‘𝑥) = 1o ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ (𝑋 ∖ 𝐴)(𝐹‘𝑥) = ∅)))
Theorem	bj-charfundcALT 15819*	Alternate proof of bj-charfundc 15818. It was expected to be much shorter since it uses bj-charfun 15817 for the main part of the proof and the rest is basic computations, but these turn out to be lengthy, maybe because of the limited library of available lemmas. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Aug-2024.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝐹 = (𝑥 ∈ 𝑋 ↦ if(𝑥 ∈ 𝐴, 1o, ∅)))    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑋 DECID 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐹:𝑋⟶2o ∧ (∀𝑥 ∈ (𝑋 ∩ 𝐴)(𝐹‘𝑥) = 1o ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ (𝑋 ∖ 𝐴)(𝐹‘𝑥) = ∅)))
Theorem	bj-charfunr 15820*	If a class 𝐴 has a "weak" characteristic function on a class 𝑋, then negated membership in 𝐴 is decidable (in other words, membership in 𝐴 is testable) in 𝑋. The hypothesis imposes that 𝑋 be a set. As usual, it could be formulated as ⊢ (𝜑 → (𝐹:𝑋⟶ω ∧ ...)) to deal with general classes, but that extra generality would not make the theorem much more useful. The theorem would still hold if the codomain of 𝑓 were any class with testable equality to the point where (𝑋 ∖ 𝐴) is sent. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Aug-2024.)
⊢ (𝜑 → ∃𝑓 ∈ (ω ↑𝑚 𝑋)(∀𝑥 ∈ (𝑋 ∩ 𝐴)(𝑓‘𝑥) ≠ ∅ ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ (𝑋 ∖ 𝐴)(𝑓‘𝑥) = ∅))    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑋 DECID ¬ 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)
Theorem	bj-charfunbi 15821*	In an ambient set 𝑋, if membership in 𝐴 is stable, then it is decidable if and only if 𝐴 has a characteristic function. This characterization can be applied to singletons when the set 𝑋 has stable equality, which is the case as soon as it has a tight apartness relation. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Aug-2024.)
⊢ (𝜑 → 𝑋 ∈ 𝑉)    &   ⊢ (𝜑 → ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑋 STAB 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)    ⇒   ⊢ (𝜑 → (∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑋 DECID 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ↔ ∃𝑓 ∈ (2o ↑𝑚 𝑋)(∀𝑥 ∈ (𝑋 ∩ 𝐴)(𝑓‘𝑥) = 1o ∧ ∀𝑥 ∈ (𝑋 ∖ 𝐴)(𝑓‘𝑥) = ∅)))
14.2.8  Constructive Zermelo--Fraenkel set theory (CZF): Bounded formulas and classes This section develops constructive Zermelo--Fraenkel set theory (CZF) on top of intuitionistic logic. It is a constructive theory in the sense that its logic is intuitionistic and it is predicative. "Predicative" means that new sets can be constructed only from already constructed sets. In particular, the axiom of separation ax-sep 4166 is not predicative (because we cannot allow all formulas to define a subset) and is replaced in CZF by bounded separation ax-bdsep 15894. Because this axiom is weaker than full separation, the axiom of replacement or collection ax-coll 4163 of ZF and IZF has to be strengthened in CZF to the axiom of strong collection ax-strcoll 15992 (which is a theorem of IZF), and the axiom of infinity needs a more precise version, the von Neumann axiom of infinity ax-infvn 15951. Similarly, the axiom of powerset ax-pow 4222 is not predicative (checking whether a set is included in another requires to universally quantifier over that "not yet constructed" set) and is replaced in CZF by the axiom of fullness or the axiom of subset collection ax-sscoll 15997. In an intuitionistic context, the axiom of regularity is stated in IZF as well as in CZF as the axiom of set induction ax-setind 4589. It is sometimes interesting to study the weakening of CZF where that axiom is replaced by bounded set induction ax-bdsetind 15978. For more details on CZF, a useful set of notes is Peter Aczel and Michael Rathjen, CST Book draft. (available at http://www1.maths.leeds.ac.uk/~rathjen/book.pdf 15978) and an interesting article is Michael Shulman, Comparing material and structural set theories, Annals of Pure and Applied Logic, Volume 170, Issue 4 (Apr. 2019), 465--504. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1808.05204 15978 I also thank Michael Rathjen and Michael Shulman for useful hints in the formulation of some results.
14.2.8.1  Bounded formulas The present definition of bounded formulas emerged from a discussion on GitHub between Jim Kingdon, Mario Carneiro and I, started 23-Sept-2019 (see https://github.com/metamath/set.mm/issues/1173 and links therein). In order to state certain axiom schemes of Constructive Zermelo–Fraenkel (CZF) set theory, like the axiom scheme of bounded (or restricted, or Δ0) separation, it is necessary to distinguish certain formulas, called bounded (or restricted, or Δ0) formulas. The necessity of considering bounded formulas also arises in several theories of bounded arithmetic, both classical or intuitionistic, for instance to state the axiom scheme of Δ0-induction. To formalize this in Metamath, there are several choices to make. A first choice is to either create a new type for bounded formulas, or to create a predicate on formulas that indicates whether they are bounded. In the first case, one creates a new type "wff0" with a new set of metavariables (ph0 ...) and an axiom "$a wff ph0 " ensuring that bounded formulas are formulas, so that one can reuse existing theorems, and then axioms take the form "$a wff0 ( ph0 -> ps0 )", etc. In the second case, one introduces a predicate "BOUNDED " with the intended meaning that "BOUNDED 𝜑 " is a formula meaning that 𝜑 is a bounded formula. We choose the second option, since the first would complicate the grammar, risking to make it ambiguous. (TODO: elaborate.) A second choice is to view "bounded" either as a syntactic or a semantic property. For instance, ∀𝑥⊤ is not syntactically bounded since it has an unbounded universal quantifier, but it is semantically bounded since it is equivalent to ⊤ which is bounded. We choose the second option, so that formulas using defined symbols can be proved bounded. A third choice is in the form of the axioms, either in closed form or in inference form. One cannot state all the axioms in closed form, especially ax-bd0 15823. Indeed, if we posited it in closed form, then we could prove for instance ⊢ (𝜑 → BOUNDED 𝜑) and ⊢ (¬ 𝜑 → BOUNDED 𝜑) which is problematic (with the law of excluded middle, this would entail that all formulas are bounded, but even without it, too many formulas could be proved bounded...). (TODO: elaborate.) Having ax-bd0 15823 in inference form ensures that a formula can be proved bounded only if it is equivalent *for all values of the free variables* to a syntactically bounded one. The other axioms (ax-bdim 15824 through ax-bdsb 15832) can be written either in closed or inference form. The fact that ax-bd0 15823 is an inference is enough to ensure that the closed forms cannot be "exploited" to prove that some unbounded formulas are bounded. (TODO: check.) However, we state all the axioms in inference form to make it clear that we do not exploit any over-permissiveness. Finally, note that our logic has no terms, only variables. Therefore, we cannot prove for instance that 𝑥 ∈ ω is a bounded formula. However, since ω can be defined as "the 𝑦 such that PHI" a proof using the fact that 𝑥 ∈ ω is bounded can be converted to a proof in iset.mm by replacing ω with 𝑦 everywhere and prepending the antecedent PHI, since 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 is bounded by ax-bdel 15831. For a similar method, see bj-omtrans 15966. Note that one cannot add an axiom ⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 since by bdph 15860 it would imply that every formula is bounded.
Syntax	wbd 15822	Syntax for the predicate BOUNDED.
wff BOUNDED 𝜑
Axiom	ax-bd0 15823	If two formulas are equivalent, then boundedness of one implies boundedness of the other. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (BOUNDED 𝜑 → BOUNDED 𝜓)
Axiom	ax-bdim 15824	An implication between two bounded formulas is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 25-Sep-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED (𝜑 → 𝜓)
Axiom	ax-bdan 15825	The conjunction of two bounded formulas is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 25-Sep-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓)
Axiom	ax-bdor 15826	The disjunction of two bounded formulas is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 25-Sep-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓)
Axiom	ax-bdn 15827	The negation of a bounded formula is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 25-Sep-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED ¬ 𝜑
Axiom	ax-bdal 15828*	A bounded universal quantification of a bounded formula is bounded. Note the disjoint variable condition on 𝑥, 𝑦. (Contributed by BJ, 25-Sep-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 𝜑
Axiom	ax-bdex 15829*	A bounded existential quantification of a bounded formula is bounded. Note the disjoint variable condition on 𝑥, 𝑦. (Contributed by BJ, 25-Sep-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED ∃𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 𝜑
Axiom	ax-bdeq 15830	An atomic formula is bounded (equality predicate). (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 = 𝑦
Axiom	ax-bdel 15831	An atomic formula is bounded (membership predicate). (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦
Axiom	ax-bdsb 15832	A formula resulting from proper substitution in a bounded formula is bounded. This probably cannot be proved from the other axioms, since neither the definiens in df-sb 1787, nor probably any other equivalent formula, is syntactically bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑
Theorem	bdeq 15833	Equality property for the predicate BOUNDED. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ (BOUNDED 𝜑 ↔ BOUNDED 𝜓)
Theorem	bd0 15834	A formula equivalent to a bounded one is bounded. See also bd0r 15835. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜓
Theorem	bd0r 15835	A formula equivalent to a bounded one is bounded. Stated with a commuted (compared with bd0 15834) biconditional in the hypothesis, to work better with definitions (𝜓 is the definiendum that one wants to prove bounded). (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝜓 ↔ 𝜑)    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜓
Theorem	bdbi 15836	A biconditional between two bounded formulas is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓)
Theorem	bdstab 15837	Stability of a bounded formula is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED STAB 𝜑
Theorem	bddc 15838	Decidability of a bounded formula is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED DECID 𝜑
Theorem	bd3or 15839	A disjunction of three bounded formulas is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜓    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜒    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED (𝜑 ∨ 𝜓 ∨ 𝜒)
Theorem	bd3an 15840	A conjunction of three bounded formulas is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜓    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜒    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED (𝜑 ∧ 𝜓 ∧ 𝜒)
Theorem	bdth 15841	A truth (a (closed) theorem) is a bounded formula. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2019.)
⊢ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑
Theorem	bdtru 15842	The truth value ⊤ is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED ⊤
Theorem	bdfal 15843	The truth value ⊥ is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED ⊥
Theorem	bdnth 15844	A falsity is a bounded formula. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2019.)
⊢ ¬ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑
Theorem	bdnthALT 15845	Alternate proof of bdnth 15844 not using bdfal 15843. Then, bdfal 15843 can be proved from this theorem, using fal 1380. The total number of proof steps would be 17 (for bdnthALT 15845) + 3 = 20, which is more than 8 (for bdfal 15843) + 9 (for bdnth 15844) = 17. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ ¬ 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑
Theorem	bdxor 15846	The exclusive disjunction of two bounded formulas is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜓    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED (𝜑 ⊻ 𝜓)
Theorem	bj-bdcel 15847*	Boundedness of a membership formula. (Contributed by BJ, 8-Dec-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝑦 = 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴 ∈ 𝑥
Theorem	bdab 15848	Membership in a class defined by class abstraction using a bounded formula, is a bounded formula. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 ∈ {𝑦 ∣ 𝜑}
Theorem	bdcdeq 15849	Conditional equality of a bounded formula is a bounded formula. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED CondEq(𝑥 = 𝑦 → 𝜑)
14.2.8.2  Bounded classes In line with our definitions of classes as extensions of predicates, it is useful to define a predicate for bounded classes, which is done in df-bdc 15851. Note that this notion is only a technical device which can be used to shorten proofs of (semantic) boundedness of formulas. As will be clear by the end of this subsection (see for instance bdop 15885), one can prove the boundedness of any concrete term using only setvars and bounded formulas, for instance, ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑 ⇒ ⊢ BOUNDED ⟨{𝑥 ∣ 𝜑}, ({𝑦, suc 𝑧} × ⟨𝑡, ∅⟩)⟩. The proofs are long since one has to prove boundedness at each step of the construction, without being able to prove general theorems like ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴 ⇒ ⊢ BOUNDED {𝐴}.
Syntax	wbdc 15850	Syntax for the predicate BOUNDED.
wff BOUNDED 𝐴
Definition	df-bdc 15851*	Define a bounded class as one such that membership in this class is a bounded formula. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ (BOUNDED 𝐴 ↔ ∀𝑥BOUNDED 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)
Theorem	bdceq 15852	Equality property for the predicate BOUNDED. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ (BOUNDED 𝐴 ↔ BOUNDED 𝐵)
Theorem	bdceqi 15853	A class equal to a bounded one is bounded. Note the use of ax-ext 2188. See also bdceqir 15854. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    &   ⊢ 𝐴 = 𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐵
Theorem	bdceqir 15854	A class equal to a bounded one is bounded. Stated with a commuted (compared with bdceqi 15853) equality in the hypothesis, to work better with definitions (𝐵 is the definiendum that one wants to prove bounded; see comment of bd0r 15835). (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    &   ⊢ 𝐵 = 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐵
Theorem	bdel 15855*	The belonging of a setvar in a bounded class is a bounded formula. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ (BOUNDED 𝐴 → BOUNDED 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴)
Theorem	bdeli 15856*	Inference associated with bdel 15855. Its converse is bdelir 15857. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴
Theorem	bdelir 15857*	Inference associated with df-bdc 15851. Its converse is bdeli 15856. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 ∈ 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴
Theorem	bdcv 15858	A setvar is a bounded class. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥
Theorem	bdcab 15859	A class defined by class abstraction using a bounded formula is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑}
Theorem	bdph 15860	A formula which defines (by class abstraction) a bounded class is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 6-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED {𝑥 ∣ 𝜑}    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑
Theorem	bds 15861*	Boundedness of a formula resulting from implicit substitution in a bounded formula. Note that the proof does not use ax-bdsb 15832; therefore, using implicit instead of explicit substitution when boundedness is important, one might avoid using ax-bdsb 15832. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Nov-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ (𝑥 = 𝑦 → (𝜑 ↔ 𝜓))    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜓
Theorem	bdcrab 15862*	A class defined by restricted abstraction from a bounded class and a bounded formula is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED {𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∣ 𝜑}
Theorem	bdne 15863	Inequality of two setvars is a bounded formula. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 ≠ 𝑦
Theorem	bdnel 15864*	Non-membership of a setvar in a bounded formula is a bounded formula. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 ∉ 𝐴
Theorem	bdreu 15865*	Boundedness of existential uniqueness. Remark regarding restricted quantifiers: the formula ∀𝑥 ∈ 𝐴𝜑 need not be bounded even if 𝐴 and 𝜑 are. Indeed, V is bounded by bdcvv 15867, and ⊢ (∀𝑥 ∈ V𝜑 ↔ ∀𝑥𝜑) (in minimal propositional calculus), so by bd0 15834, if ∀𝑥 ∈ V𝜑 were bounded when 𝜑 is bounded, then ∀𝑥𝜑 would be bounded as well when 𝜑 is bounded, which is not the case. The same remark holds with ∃, ∃!, ∃*. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED ∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 𝜑
Theorem	bdrmo 15866*	Boundedness of existential at-most-one. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED ∃*𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 𝜑
Theorem	bdcvv 15867	The universal class is bounded. The formulation may sound strange, but recall that here, "bounded" means "Δ0". (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED V
Theorem	bdsbc 15868	A formula resulting from proper substitution of a setvar for a setvar in a bounded formula is bounded. See also bdsbcALT 15869. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑
Theorem	bdsbcALT 15869	Alternate proof of bdsbc 15868. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED [𝑦 / 𝑥]𝜑
Theorem	bdccsb 15870	A class resulting from proper substitution of a setvar for a setvar in a bounded class is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED ⦋𝑦 / 𝑥⦌𝐴
Theorem	bdcdif 15871	The difference of two bounded classes is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED (𝐴 ∖ 𝐵)
Theorem	bdcun 15872	The union of two bounded classes is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED (𝐴 ∪ 𝐵)
Theorem	bdcin 15873	The intersection of two bounded classes is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝐵    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED (𝐴 ∩ 𝐵)
Theorem	bdss 15874	The inclusion of a setvar in a bounded class is a bounded formula. Note: apparently, we cannot prove from the present axioms that equality of two bounded classes is a bounded formula. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 ⊆ 𝐴
Theorem	bdcnul 15875	The empty class is bounded. See also bdcnulALT 15876. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED ∅
Theorem	bdcnulALT 15876	Alternate proof of bdcnul 15875. Similarly, for the next few theorems proving boundedness of a class, one can either use their definition followed by bdceqir 15854, or use the corresponding characterizations of its elements followed by bdelir 15857. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ BOUNDED ∅
Theorem	bdeq0 15877	Boundedness of the formula expressing that a setvar is equal to the empty class. (Contributed by BJ, 21-Nov-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 = ∅
Theorem	bj-bd0el 15878	Boundedness of the formula "the empty set belongs to the setvar 𝑥". (Contributed by BJ, 30-Nov-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED ∅ ∈ 𝑥
Theorem	bdcpw 15879	The power class of a bounded class is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 3-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝒫 𝐴
Theorem	bdcsn 15880	The singleton of a setvar is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED {𝑥}
Theorem	bdcpr 15881	The pair of two setvars is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED {𝑥, 𝑦}
Theorem	bdctp 15882	The unordered triple of three setvars is bounded. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED {𝑥, 𝑦, 𝑧}
Theorem	bdsnss 15883*	Inclusion of a singleton of a setvar in a bounded class is a bounded formula. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED {𝑥} ⊆ 𝐴
Theorem	bdvsn 15884*	Equality of a setvar with a singleton of a setvar is a bounded formula. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 = {𝑦}
Theorem	bdop 15885	The ordered pair of two setvars is a bounded class. (Contributed by BJ, 21-Nov-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED ⟨𝑥, 𝑦⟩
Theorem	bdcuni 15886	The union of a setvar is a bounded class. (Contributed by BJ, 15-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED ∪ 𝑥
Theorem	bdcint 15887	The intersection of a setvar is a bounded class. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED ∩ 𝑥
Theorem	bdciun 15888*	The indexed union of a bounded class with a setvar indexing set is a bounded class. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED ∪ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 𝐴
Theorem	bdciin 15889*	The indexed intersection of a bounded class with a setvar indexing set is a bounded class. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝐴    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED ∩ 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 𝐴
Theorem	bdcsuc 15890	The successor of a setvar is a bounded class. (Contributed by BJ, 16-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED suc 𝑥
Theorem	bdeqsuc 15891*	Boundedness of the formula expressing that a setvar is equal to the successor of another. (Contributed by BJ, 21-Nov-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝑥 = suc 𝑦
Theorem	bj-bdsucel 15892	Boundedness of the formula "the successor of the setvar 𝑥 belongs to the setvar 𝑦". (Contributed by BJ, 30-Nov-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED suc 𝑥 ∈ 𝑦
Theorem	bdcriota 15893*	A class given by a restricted definition binder is bounded, under the given hypotheses. (Contributed by BJ, 24-Nov-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    &   ⊢ ∃!𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ BOUNDED (℩𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 𝜑)
14.2.9  CZF: Bounded separation In this section, we state the axiom scheme of bounded separation, which is part of CZF set theory.
Axiom	ax-bdsep 15894*	Axiom scheme of bounded (or restricted, or Δ0) separation. It is stated with all possible disjoint variable conditions, to show that this weak form is sufficient. For the full axiom of separation, see ax-sep 4166. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ∀𝑎∃𝑏∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑏 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	bdsep1 15895*	Version of ax-bdsep 15894 without initial universal quantifier. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑏∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑏 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	bdsep2 15896*	Version of ax-bdsep 15894 with one disjoint variable condition removed and without initial universal quantifier. Use bdsep1 15895 when sufficient. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑏∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑏 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	bdsepnft 15897*	Closed form of bdsepnf 15898. Version of ax-bdsep 15894 with one disjoint variable condition removed, the other disjoint variable condition replaced by a nonfreeness antecedent, and without initial universal quantifier. Use bdsep1 15895 when sufficient. (Contributed by BJ, 19-Oct-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (∀𝑥Ⅎ𝑏𝜑 → ∃𝑏∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑏 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∧ 𝜑)))
Theorem	bdsepnf 15898*	Version of ax-bdsep 15894 with one disjoint variable condition removed, the other disjoint variable condition replaced by a nonfreeness hypothesis, and without initial universal quantifier. See also bdsepnfALT 15899. Use bdsep1 15895 when sufficient. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Oct-2019.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑏𝜑    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑏∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑏 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	bdsepnfALT 15899*	Alternate proof of bdsepnf 15898, not using bdsepnft 15897. (Contributed by BJ, 5-Oct-2019.) (Proof modification is discouraged.) (New usage is discouraged.)
⊢ Ⅎ𝑏𝜑    &   ⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ ∃𝑏∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑏 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝑎 ∧ 𝜑))
Theorem	bdzfauscl 15900*	Closed form of the version of zfauscl 4168 for bounded formulas using bounded separation. (Contributed by BJ, 13-Nov-2019.)
⊢ BOUNDED 𝜑    ⇒   ⊢ (𝐴 ∈ 𝑉 → ∃𝑦∀𝑥(𝑥 ∈ 𝑦 ↔ (𝑥 ∈ 𝐴 ∧ 𝜑)))