@stevenvo780/st-lang 3.1.3 → 3.2.0

package/dist/profiles/classical/propositional.js

@@ -796,8 +796,18 @@ function isRelevantToGoal(f, goal) {
 }
 function addDerivedFormula(state, formula, justification, premises, source = 'rule') {
     const hash = formulaHash(formula);
-    if (state.known.has(hash))
+    if (state.known.has(hash)) {
+        const variants = state.alternativeDerivations.get(hash) ?? [];
+        const isDuplicate = variants.some((variant) => variant.justification === justification &&
+            variant.source === source &&
+            variant.premises.length === premises.length &&
+            variant.premises.every((premise, index) => premise === premises[index]));
+        if (!isDuplicate) {
+            variants.push({ justification, premises: [...premises], source });
+            state.alternativeDerivations.set(hash, variants);
+        }
         return false;
+    }
     state.stepCount++;
     state.steps.push({
         stepNumber: state.stepCount,
@@ -807,6 +817,8 @@ function addDerivedFormula(state, formula, justification, premises, source = 'ru
         source,
     });
     state.known.set(hash, formula);
+    state.formulas.push(formula);
+    state.stepByHash.set(hash, state.stepCount);
     return true;
 }
 function buildPremiseRefs(theory, premiseNames) {
@@ -815,7 +827,12 @@ function buildPremiseRefs(theory, premiseNames) {
         location: (theory.axioms.get(name) || theory.theorems.get(name))?.source,
     }));
 }
-function buildProof(goal, steps, premiseNames, theory, method = 'natural_deduction', subproofs) {
+function buildProof(goal, steps, premiseNames, theory, method = 'natural_deduction', subproofs, metadataExtras = {}) {
+    const metadata = {
+        createdAt: new Date().toISOString(),
+        profile: theory.profile,
+        ...metadataExtras,
+    };
     return {
         goal,
         steps,
@@ -823,11 +840,56 @@ function buildProof(goal, steps, premiseNames, theory, method = 'natural_deducti
         derivedFrom: premiseNames,
         premiseRefs: buildPremiseRefs(theory, premiseNames),
         method,
-        subproofs,
-        metadata: {
-            createdAt: new Date().toISOString(),
-            profile: theory.profile,
-        },
+        subproofs: subproofs ? [...subproofs] : undefined,
+        metadata,
+    };
+}
+function buildDerivationMetadata(state, retainedSteps, semanticFallback = false) {
+    const sampledAlternatives = Array.from(state.alternativeDerivations.entries())
+        .filter(([, variants]) => variants.length > 0)
+        .sort((left, right) => right[1].length - left[1].length)
+        .slice(0, 12)
+        .map(([hash, variants]) => ({
+        formula: hash,
+        primaryStep: state.stepByHash.get(hash) ?? 0,
+        variants: variants.slice(0, 6).map((variant) => ({
+            justification: variant.justification,
+            premises: [...variant.premises],
+            source: variant.source,
+        })),
+    }));
+    const alternativeDerivationCount = Array.from(state.alternativeDerivations.values()).reduce((count, variants) => count + variants.length, 0);
+    return {
+        exploredStepCount: state.steps.length,
+        retainedStepCount: retainedSteps.length,
+        uniqueFormulaCount: state.formulas.length,
+        alternativeDerivationCount,
+        alternativeDerivationSamples: sampledAlternatives,
+        semanticFallback,
+    };
+}
+function buildCompositeDerivationMetadata(state, retainedSteps, subProofs = [], semanticFallback = false) {
+    const baseMetadata = buildDerivationMetadata(state, retainedSteps, semanticFallback);
+    const baseExploredStepCount = Number(baseMetadata.exploredStepCount ?? 0);
+    const baseAlternativeDerivationCount = Number(baseMetadata.alternativeDerivationCount ?? 0);
+    const subExploredStepCount = subProofs.reduce((count, subProof) => {
+        const subMetadata = subProof.metadata ?? {};
+        const explored = Number(subMetadata.exploredStepCount ?? subProof.steps.length);
+        return count + explored;
+    }, 0);
+    const subAlternativeDerivationCount = subProofs.reduce((count, subProof) => {
+        const subMetadata = subProof.metadata ?? {};
+        const alternatives = Number(subMetadata.alternativeDerivationCount ?? 0);
+        return count + alternatives;
+    }, 0);
+    const exploredStepCount = baseExploredStepCount + subExploredStepCount;
+    const alternativeDerivationCount = baseAlternativeDerivationCount + subAlternativeDerivationCount;
+    return {
+        ...baseMetadata,
+        exploredStepCount,
+        retainedStepCount: retainedSteps.length,
+        alternativeDerivationCount,
+        alternativeDerivationSamples: [],
     };
 }
 function isNegationOf(a, b) {
@@ -838,6 +900,116 @@ function isExcludedMiddleFormula(formula) {
         return false;
     return (isNegationOf(formula.args[0], formula.args[1]) || isNegationOf(formula.args[1], formula.args[0]));
 }
+function buildSingleAssumptionProof(premiseSteps, assumption, assumptionJustification, subProof, goal, finalJustification) {
+    const mainSteps = [];
+    let stepNum = 0;
+    for (const s of premiseSteps) {
+        if (s.source === 'premise') {
+            stepNum++;
+            mainSteps.push({ ...s, stepNumber: stepNum, premises: [] });
+        }
+    }
+    stepNum++;
+    const assumptionStepNum = stepNum;
+    mainSteps.push({
+        stepNumber: stepNum,
+        formula: assumption,
+        justification: assumptionJustification,
+        premises: [],
+        source: 'assumption',
+    });
+    const subStepMap = new Map();
+    for (const s of subProof.steps) {
+        if (s.source === 'premise' && formulasEqual(s.formula, assumption)) {
+            subStepMap.set(s.stepNumber, assumptionStepNum);
+            continue;
+        }
+        if (s.source === 'premise') {
+            const existing = mainSteps.find((ms) => ms.source === 'premise' && formulasEqual(ms.formula, s.formula));
+            if (existing) {
+                subStepMap.set(s.stepNumber, existing.stepNumber);
+                continue;
+            }
+        }
+        stepNum++;
+        subStepMap.set(s.stepNumber, stepNum);
+        mainSteps.push({
+            stepNumber: stepNum,
+            formula: s.formula,
+            justification: s.justification,
+            premises: s.premises.map((p) => subStepMap.get(p) || p),
+            source: s.source,
+        });
+    }
+    stepNum++;
+    const subGoalStepNum = subStepMap.get(subProof.steps[subProof.steps.length - 1]?.stepNumber ?? 0) ?? stepNum - 1;
+    mainSteps.push({
+        stepNumber: stepNum,
+        formula: goal,
+        justification: finalJustification,
+        premises: [assumptionStepNum, subGoalStepNum],
+        subproofs: [subProof],
+        source: 'rule',
+    });
+    return mainSteps;
+}
+function buildMergedGoalProof(premiseSteps, subProofs, goal, finalJustification) {
+    const mainSteps = [];
+    let stepNum = 0;
+    const baseStepByHash = new Map();
+    for (const s of premiseSteps) {
+        if (s.source === 'premise') {
+            stepNum++;
+            mainSteps.push({ ...s, stepNumber: stepNum, premises: [] });
+            baseStepByHash.set(formulaHash(s.formula), stepNum);
+        }
+    }
+    const finalPremises = [];
+    for (const subProof of subProofs) {
+        const stepMap = new Map();
+        for (const s of subProof.steps) {
+            const hash = formulaHash(s.formula);
+            if (s.source === 'premise' && baseStepByHash.has(hash)) {
+                stepMap.set(s.stepNumber, baseStepByHash.get(hash) ?? 0);
+                continue;
+            }
+            if (s.source !== 'assumption' && baseStepByHash.has(hash)) {
+                stepMap.set(s.stepNumber, baseStepByHash.get(hash) ?? 0);
+                continue;
+            }
+            stepNum++;
+            stepMap.set(s.stepNumber, stepNum);
+            mainSteps.push({
+                stepNumber: stepNum,
+                formula: s.formula,
+                justification: s.justification,
+                premises: s.premises.map((p) => stepMap.get(p) || p),
+                subproofs: s.subproofs ? [...s.subproofs] : undefined,
+                source: s.source,
+            });
+            if (s.source !== 'assumption') {
+                baseStepByHash.set(hash, stepNum);
+            }
+        }
+        const mappedFinal = stepMap.get(subProof.steps[subProof.steps.length - 1]?.stepNumber ?? 0);
+        if (mappedFinal)
+            finalPremises.push(mappedFinal);
+    }
+    stepNum++;
+    mainSteps.push({
+        stepNumber: stepNum,
+        formula: goal,
+        justification: finalJustification,
+        premises: finalPremises,
+        subproofs: subProofs,
+        source: 'rule',
+    });
+    return mainSteps;
+}
+function buildKnownDerivationProof(state, formula, premiseNames, theory) {
+    const relevantSteps = traceBack(state.steps, formula);
+    return buildProof(formula, relevantSteps, premiseNames, theory, 'natural_deduction', undefined, buildDerivationMetadata(state, relevantSteps));
+}
 function getCommutativeVariant(formula) {
     if ((formula.kind === 'and' || formula.kind === 'or') && formula.args?.[0] && formula.args?.[1]) {
         return { kind: formula.kind, args: [formula.args[1], formula.args[0]] };
@@ -883,8 +1055,11 @@ function getAbsorptionResult(formula) {
 function tryDerive(goal, theory, premiseNames, depth = 0) {
     const state = {
         known: new Map(),
+        formulas: [],
         steps: [],
         stepCount: 0,
+        stepByHash: new Map(),
+        alternativeDerivations: new Map(),
     };
     // Cargar premisas
     for (const name of premiseNames) {
@@ -917,6 +1092,8 @@ function tryDerive(goal, theory, premiseNames, depth = 0) {
                 source: 'premise',
             });
             state.known.set(formulaHash(f), f);
+            state.formulas.push(f);
+            state.stepByHash.set(formulaHash(f), state.stepCount);
         }
     }
     if (isExcludedMiddleFormula(goal)) {
@@ -930,7 +1107,7 @@ function tryDerive(goal, theory, premiseNames, depth = 0) {
     while (changed && iterations < maxIterations && state.known.size < MAX_KNOWN) {
         changed = false;
         iterations++;
-        const currentFormulas = Array.from(state.known.values());
+        const currentFormulas = state.formulas;
         const prevProcessedIndex = lastProcessedIndex;
         lastProcessedIndex = currentFormulas.length;
         for (let i = 0; i < currentFormulas.length; i++) {
@@ -944,6 +1121,15 @@ function tryDerive(goal, theory, premiseNames, depth = 0) {
                 const f2 = currentFormulas[j];
                 if (state.known.has(formulaHash(goal)))
                     break;
+                // Contradicción explícita: de A y !A, derivar false (⊥)
+                if ((f1.kind === 'not' && f1.args?.[0] && formulasEqual(f1.args[0], f2)) ||
+                    (f2.kind === 'not' && f2.args?.[0] && formulasEqual(f2.args[0], f1))) {
+                    changed =
+                        addDerivedFormula(state, { kind: 'false' }, 'Contradiccion', [
+                            findStep(state.steps, f1),
+                            findStep(state.steps, f2),
+                        ]) || changed;
+                }
                 // Modus Ponens: de A y (A -> B), derivar B
                 if (f2.kind === 'implies' &&
                     f2.args?.[0] &&
@@ -978,6 +1164,19 @@ function tryDerive(goal, theory, premiseNames, depth = 0) {
                             findStep(state.steps, f2),
                         ]) || changed;
                 }
+                // Modus Tollens con consecuente negado: de B y (A -> !B), derivar !A
+                if (f2.kind === 'implies' &&
+                    f2.args?.[0] &&
+                    f2.args?.[1]?.kind === 'not' &&
+                    f2.args[1].args?.[0] &&
+                    formulasEqual(f1, f2.args[1].args[0])) {
+                    const conclusion = { kind: 'not', args: [f2.args[0]] };
+                    changed =
+                        addDerivedFormula(state, conclusion, 'Modus Tollens', [
+                            findStep(state.steps, f1),
+                            findStep(state.steps, f2),
+                        ]) || changed;
+                }
                 // Conjunction Introduction: de A y B, derivar A & B
                 // Only produce conjunctions that are relevant to the goal to avoid O(n²) explosion
                 if (f1 !== f2) {
@@ -1166,6 +1365,11 @@ function tryDerive(goal, theory, premiseNames, depth = 0) {
                         ]) || changed;
                 }
             }
+            // Eliminación de contradicción: de false (⊥), derivar cualquier meta
+            if (f1.kind === 'false' && !formulasEqual(f1, goal)) {
+                changed =
+                    addDerivedFormula(state, goal, 'Explosion', [findStep(state.steps, f1)]) || changed;
+            }
             // Conjunction Elimination: de A & B, derivar A y B
             if (f1.kind === 'and' && f1.args) {
                 for (const sub of f1.args) {
@@ -1506,10 +1710,10 @@ function tryDerive(goal, theory, premiseNames, depth = 0) {
     if (state.known.has(formulaHash(goal))) {
         // Filtrar solo pasos relevantes para la derivación
         const relevantSteps = traceBack(state.steps, goal);
-        return buildProof(goal, relevantSteps, premiseNames, theory);
+        return buildProof(goal, relevantSteps, premiseNames, theory, 'natural_deduction', undefined, buildDerivationMetadata(state, relevantSteps));
     }
     // --- Sub-derivaciones recursivas (antes del fallback semántico) ---
-    const MAX_SUB_DEPTH = 2;
+    const MAX_SUB_DEPTH = 3;
     // Prueba Condicional real (→-Introducción / Deduction Theorem):
     // Para derivar A→B, asumimos A como premisa temporal y derivamos B.
     if (depth < MAX_SUB_DEPTH && goal.kind === 'implies' && goal.args?.[0] && goal.args?.[1]) {
@@ -1587,14 +1791,14 @@ function tryDerive(goal, theory, premiseNames, depth = 0) {
                     subproofs: [subProof],
                     source: 'rule',
                 });
-                return buildProof(goal, mainSteps, premiseNames, theory, 'natural_deduction', [subProof]);
+                return buildProof(goal, mainSteps, premiseNames, theory, 'natural_deduction', [subProof], buildCompositeDerivationMetadata(state, mainSteps, [subProof]));
             }
         }
     }
     // Prueba por Casos (∨-Eliminación / Disjunction Elimination):
     // Si tenemos A|B y queremos derivar C, asumimos A→C y B→C por separado.
     if (depth < MAX_SUB_DEPTH) {
-        const disjunctions = Array.from(state.known.values()).filter((f) => f.kind === 'or' && f.args?.[0] && f.args?.[1]);
+        const disjunctions = state.formulas.filter((f) => f.kind === 'or' && f.args?.[0] && f.args?.[1]);
         for (const disj of disjunctions) {
             const left = disj.args?.[0];
             const right = disj.args?.[1];
@@ -1723,10 +1927,113 @@ function tryDerive(goal, theory, premiseNames, depth = 0) {
                 subproofs: [subProofL, subProofR],
                 source: 'rule',
             });
-            return buildProof(goal, mainSteps, premiseNames, theory, 'natural_deduction', [
-                subProofL,
-                subProofR,
-            ]);
+            return buildProof(goal, mainSteps, premiseNames, theory, 'natural_deduction', [subProofL, subProofR], buildCompositeDerivationMetadata(state, mainSteps, [subProofL, subProofR]));
+        }
+    }
+    // Backchaining dirigido por meta: si tenemos A → objetivo,
+    // intentamos derivar A para cerrar con Modus Ponens sin esperar a que aparezca espontáneamente.
+    if (depth < MAX_SUB_DEPTH) {
+        const candidateImplications = state.formulas.filter((formula) => formula.kind === 'implies' &&
+            !!formula.args?.[0] &&
+            !!formula.args?.[1] &&
+            formulasEqual(formula.args[1], goal));
+        for (const implication of candidateImplications) {
+            const antecedent = implication.args?.[0];
+            if (!antecedent || formulasEqual(antecedent, goal))
+                continue;
+            const antecedentProof = tryDerive(antecedent, theory, premiseNames, depth + 1);
+            if (!antecedentProof || antecedentProof.status !== 'complete')
+                continue;
+            const antecedentIsSyntactic = antecedentProof.steps.every((step) => step.source !== 'semantic');
+            if (!antecedentIsSyntactic)
+                continue;
+            const implicationProof = buildKnownDerivationProof(state, implication, premiseNames, theory);
+            const mainSteps = buildMergedGoalProof(state.steps, [implicationProof, antecedentProof], goal, 'Modus Ponens');
+            return buildProof(goal, mainSteps, premiseNames, theory, 'natural_deduction', [implicationProof, antecedentProof], buildCompositeDerivationMetadata(state, mainSteps, [implicationProof, antecedentProof]));
+        }
+    }
+    // Meta conjuntiva (∧-Introducción dirigida por meta): derivar ambos componentes por separado.
+    if (depth < MAX_SUB_DEPTH && goal.kind === 'and' && goal.args?.[0] && goal.args?.[1]) {
+        const leftGoal = goal.args[0];
+        const rightGoal = goal.args[1];
+        const leftProof = tryDerive(leftGoal, theory, premiseNames, depth + 1);
+        const rightProof = tryDerive(rightGoal, theory, premiseNames, depth + 1);
+        if (leftProof &&
+            rightProof &&
+            leftProof.status === 'complete' &&
+            rightProof.status === 'complete') {
+            const leftSyntactic = leftProof.steps.every((s) => s.source !== 'semantic');
+            const rightSyntactic = rightProof.steps.every((s) => s.source !== 'semantic');
+            if (leftSyntactic && rightSyntactic) {
+                const mainSteps = buildMergedGoalProof(state.steps, [leftProof, rightProof], goal, 'Introduccion de conjuncion');
+                return buildProof(goal, mainSteps, premiseNames, theory, 'natural_deduction', [leftProof, rightProof], buildCompositeDerivationMetadata(state, mainSteps, [leftProof, rightProof]));
+            }
+        }
+    }
+    // Meta bicondicional (↔-Introducción dirigida por meta): demostrar ambos sentidos.
+    if (depth < MAX_SUB_DEPTH && goal.kind === 'biconditional' && goal.args?.[0] && goal.args?.[1]) {
+        const leftToRight = { kind: 'implies', args: [goal.args[0], goal.args[1]] };
+        const rightToLeft = { kind: 'implies', args: [goal.args[1], goal.args[0]] };
+        const leftProof = tryDerive(leftToRight, theory, premiseNames, depth + 1);
+        const rightProof = tryDerive(rightToLeft, theory, premiseNames, depth + 1);
+        if (leftProof &&
+            rightProof &&
+            leftProof.status === 'complete' &&
+            rightProof.status === 'complete') {
+            const leftSyntactic = leftProof.steps.every((s) => s.source !== 'semantic');
+            const rightSyntactic = rightProof.steps.every((s) => s.source !== 'semantic');
+            if (leftSyntactic && rightSyntactic) {
+                const mainSteps = buildMergedGoalProof(state.steps, [leftProof, rightProof], goal, 'Introduccion de bicondicional');
+                return buildProof(goal, mainSteps, premiseNames, theory, 'natural_deduction', [leftProof, rightProof], buildCompositeDerivationMetadata(state, mainSteps, [leftProof, rightProof]));
+            }
+        }
+    }
+    // Introducción de negación (¬-Introducción): para derivar ¬A,
+    // asumimos A y derivamos contradicción explícita (false / ⊥).
+    if (depth < MAX_SUB_DEPTH && goal.kind === 'not' && goal.args?.[0]) {
+        const assumption = goal.args[0];
+        const contradiction = { kind: 'false' };
+        const tempTheory = {
+            profile: theory.profile,
+            axioms: new Map(theory.axioms),
+            theorems: new Map(theory.theorems),
+            claims: theory.claims,
+            judgments: theory.judgments,
+        };
+        const assumptionName = `__neg_assumption_${depth}_${formulaHash(assumption)}`;
+        tempTheory.axioms.set(assumptionName, assumption);
+        const subPremises = [...premiseNames, assumptionName];
+        const subProof = tryDerive(contradiction, tempTheory, subPremises, depth + 1);
+        if (subProof && subProof.status === 'complete') {
+            const isSyntactic = subProof.steps.every((s) => s.source !== 'semantic');
+            if (isSyntactic) {
+                const mainSteps = buildSingleAssumptionProof(state.steps, assumption, 'Supuesto (para negacion)', subProof, goal, 'Introduccion de negacion');
+                return buildProof(goal, mainSteps, premiseNames, theory, 'natural_deduction', [subProof], buildCompositeDerivationMetadata(state, mainSteps, [subProof]));
+            }
+        }
+    }
+    // RAA genérica: para derivar A en lógica clásica,
+    // asumimos ¬A y buscamos contradicción explícita.
+    if (depth < MAX_SUB_DEPTH && goal.kind !== 'not' && goal.kind !== 'false') {
+        const assumption = { kind: 'not', args: [goal] };
+        const contradiction = { kind: 'false' };
+        const tempTheory = {
+            profile: theory.profile,
+            axioms: new Map(theory.axioms),
+            theorems: new Map(theory.theorems),
+            claims: theory.claims,
+            judgments: theory.judgments,
+        };
+        const assumptionName = `__raa_assumption_${depth}_${formulaHash(assumption)}`;
+        tempTheory.axioms.set(assumptionName, assumption);
+        const subPremises = [...premiseNames, assumptionName];
+        const subProof = tryDerive(contradiction, tempTheory, subPremises, depth + 1);
+        if (subProof && subProof.status === 'complete') {
+            const isSyntactic = subProof.steps.every((s) => s.source !== 'semantic');
+            if (isSyntactic) {
+                const mainSteps = buildSingleAssumptionProof(state.steps, assumption, 'Supuesto (para RAA)', subProof, goal, 'RAA (Reduccion al Absurdo)');
+                return buildProof(goal, mainSteps, premiseNames, theory, 'natural_deduction', [subProof], buildCompositeDerivationMetadata(state, mainSteps, [subProof]));
+            }
         }
     }
     // Fallback: verificar semánticamente
@@ -1799,13 +2106,19 @@ function tryDerive(goal, theory, premiseNames, depth = 0) {
                 state.known.set(goalHash, goal);
             }
             const relevantSteps = traceBack(state.steps, goal);
-            return buildProof(goal, relevantSteps, premiseNames, theory, 'semantic');
+            return buildProof(goal, relevantSteps, premiseNames, theory, 'semantic', undefined, buildDerivationMetadata(state, relevantSteps, true));
         }
     }
     return null;
 }
-function findStep(steps, formula) {
+function findStep(stateOrSteps, formula) {
     const hash = formulaHash(formula);
+    if (!Array.isArray(stateOrSteps)) {
+        const cached = stateOrSteps.stepByHash.get(hash);
+        if (cached !== undefined)
+            return cached;
+    }
+    const steps = Array.isArray(stateOrSteps) ? stateOrSteps : stateOrSteps.steps;
     for (const s of steps) {
         if (formulaHash(s.formula) === hash)
             return s.stepNumber;
@@ -2191,13 +2504,23 @@ class ClassicalPropositional {
                     : `${formulaToString(goal)} derivado exitosamente`,
                 proof,
                 reasoningType,
-                reasoningSchema: rulesUsed.has('Modus Ponens')
-                    ? 'φ → ψ, φ ⊢ ψ'
-                    : rulesUsed.has('Modus Tollens')
-                        ? 'φ → ψ, ¬ψ ⊢ ¬φ'
-                        : rulesUsed.has('Silogismo Hipotetico')
-                            ? 'φ → ψ, ψ → χ ⊢ φ → χ'
-                            : undefined,
+                reasoningSchema: rulesUsed.has('Introduccion de negacion')
+                    ? '[φ] ⊢ ⊥, por lo tanto ¬φ'
+                    : rulesUsed.has('RAA (Reduccion al Absurdo)')
+                        ? '[¬φ] ⊢ ⊥, por lo tanto φ'
+                        : rulesUsed.has('Contradiccion')
+                            ? 'φ, ¬φ ⊢ ⊥'
+                            : rulesUsed.has('Explosion')
+                                ? '⊥ ⊢ ψ'
+                                : rulesUsed.has('Prueba Condicional (Teorema de Deduccion)')
+                                    ? '[φ] ⊢ ψ, por lo tanto φ → ψ'
+                                    : rulesUsed.has('Modus Ponens')
+                                        ? 'φ → ψ, φ ⊢ ψ'
+                                        : rulesUsed.has('Modus Tollens')
+                                            ? 'φ → ψ, ¬ψ ⊢ ¬φ'
+                                            : rulesUsed.has('Silogismo Hipotetico')
+                                                ? 'φ → ψ, ψ → χ ⊢ φ → χ'
+                                                : undefined,
                 educationalNote: (0, educational_notes_1.pickEducationalNote)({
                     op: 'derive',
                     ok: true,